2004 Bristol Blenheim vs. 1982 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2004 Bristol Blenheim is newer by 22 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 5,900 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Bristol Blenheim is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1982 Ford Mustang weights approximately 88 kg more than 2004 Bristol Blenheim.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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. 2004 Bristol Blenheim has automatic transmission and 1982 Ford Mustang has manual transmission. 1982 Ford Mustang will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2004 Bristol Blenheim will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Bristol Blenheim | 1982 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | Bristol | Ford |
| Model | Blenheim | Mustang |
| Year Released | 2004 | 1982 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5900 cc | 4942 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 225 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1395 kg | 1483 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4680 mm | 4560 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1120 mm | 1330 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2900 mm | 2560 mm |
