2004 Audi TT vs. 2006 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2006 Ford Mustang is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Audi TT. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Audi TT would be higher. At 4,606 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Audi TT weights approximately 331 kg more than 2006 Ford Mustang.
Because 2004 Audi TT is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Ford Mustang. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Audi TT will offer significantly more control. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2006 Ford Mustang (868 Nm) has 587 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Audi TT. (281 Nm). This means 2006 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Audi TT.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Audi TT | 2006 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | Audi | Ford |
| Model | TT | Mustang |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Convertible | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1754 cc | 4606 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 225 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 281 Nm | 868 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.0:1 | 9.5:1 |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1575 kg | 1244 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4050 mm | 4770 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1880 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1410 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2430 mm | 2730 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 8.6 L/100km | 9.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 11.9 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 10.4 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 62 L | 61 L |
