2004 Ford Mustang vs. 2000 Mercury Sable
To start off, 2004 Ford Mustang is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Mercury Sable. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Mercury Sable would be higher. At 3,801 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Mercury Sable weights approximately 82 kg more than 2004 Ford Mustang.
Because 2004 Ford Mustang is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2004 Ford Mustang. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Mercury Sable, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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. Let's talk about torque, 2004 Ford Mustang (298 Nm) has 50 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Mercury Sable. (248 Nm). This means 2004 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Mercury Sable.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Ford Mustang | 2000 Mercury Sable | |
| Make | Ford | Mercury |
| Model | Mustang | Sable |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2000 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3801 cc | 3001 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 190 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 298 Nm | 248 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 6 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1492 kg | 1574 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4660 mm | 5100 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1860 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1420 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2760 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 59 L | 68 L |
