2004 Ford Mustang vs. 1955 Riley RM A
To start off, 2004 Ford Mustang is newer by 49 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1955 Riley RM A. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1955 Riley RM A would be higher. At 4,605 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Ford Mustang weights approximately 282 kg more than 1955 Riley RM A.
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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Ford Mustang | 1955 Riley RM A | |
| Make | Ford | Riley |
| Model | Mustang | RM A |
| Year Released | 2004 | 1955 |
| Engine Size | 4605 cc | 1496 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 260 HP | 0 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 1518 kg | 1236 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4660 mm | 4560 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1620 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1550 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2630 mm | 2870 mm |
