2004 Ford Mustang vs. 1966 Triumph 2000
To start off, 2004 Ford Mustang is newer by 38 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Triumph 2000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Triumph 2000 would be higher. At 3,802 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Ford Mustang (190 HP @ 6150 RPM) has 99 more horse power than 1966 Triumph 2000. (91 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1966 Triumph 2000. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Ford Mustang weights approximately 324 kg more than 1966 Triumph 2000. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2004 Ford Mustang (298 Nm) has 140 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Triumph 2000. (158 Nm). This means 2004 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Triumph 2000.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Ford Mustang | 1966 Triumph 2000 | |
Make | Ford | Triumph |
Model | Mustang | 2000 |
Year Released | 2004 | 1966 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3802 cc | 1998 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 190 HP | 91 HP |
Engine RPM | 6150 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Torque | 298 Nm | 158 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 97 mm | 74.7 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 86 mm | 76 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.3:1 | 9.3:1 |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1494 kg | 1170 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4660 mm | 4420 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1660 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1430 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2700 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 59 L | 64 L |