2004 Ford Mustang vs. 1962 Ford Thunderbird
To start off, 2004 Ford Mustang is newer by 42 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Ford Thunderbird. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Ford Thunderbird would be higher. At 6,964 cc (8 cylinders), 1962 Ford Thunderbird is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1962 Ford Thunderbird (345 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 134 more horse power than 2004 Ford Mustang. (211 HP @ 5250 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1962 Ford Thunderbird should accelerate faster than 2004 Ford Mustang. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1962 Ford Thunderbird weights approximately 355 kg more than 2004 Ford Mustang. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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 | 1962 Ford Thunderbird | |
| Make | Ford | Ford |
| Model | Mustang | Thunderbird |
| Year Released | 2004 | 1962 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4009 cc | 6964 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 211 HP | 345 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5250 RPM | 5600 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1520 kg | 1875 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4770 mm | 5210 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1880 mm | 1930 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1410 mm | 1340 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2840 mm | 2880 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 60 L | 40 L |
