2004 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 2005 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2005 Ford Mustang is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Chevrolet Tracker would be higher. At 4,009 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Ford Mustang (210 HP @ 5250 RPM) has 45 more horse power than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. (165 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Ford Mustang weights approximately 87 kg more than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2005 Ford Mustang (335 Nm) has 114 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. (221 Nm). This means 2005 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Chevrolet Tracker | 2005 Ford Mustang | |
Make | Chevrolet | Ford |
Model | Tracker | Mustang |
Year Released | 2004 | 2005 |
Body Type | SUV | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2491 cc | 4009 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 165 HP | 210 HP |
Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 5250 RPM |
Torque | 221 Nm | 335 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 84 mm | 100.5 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 75 mm | 84.4 mm |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1300 kg | 1387 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4140 mm | 4770 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1880 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1670 mm | 1390 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2490 mm | 2720 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 61 L |