2004 Ford Mustang vs. 2009 Kia Cee'd
To start off, 2009 Kia Cee'd is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 4,605 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Ford Mustang (305 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 185 more horse power than 2009 Kia Cee'd. (120 HP @ 6200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 2009 Kia Cee'd. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Ford Mustang weights approximately 311 kg more than 2009 Kia Cee'd. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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, 2009 Kia Cee'd, 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 (434 Nm) has 280 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Kia Cee'd. (154 Nm). This means 2004 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Kia Cee'd.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Ford Mustang | 2009 Kia Cee'd | |
Make | Ford | Kia |
Model | Mustang | Cee'd |
Year Released | 2004 | 2009 |
Body Type | Coupe | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4605 cc | 1591 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 305 HP | 120 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6200 RPM |
Torque | 434 Nm | 154 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 90.1 mm | 77.1 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 90 mm | 85.4 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.1:1 | 10.5:1 |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1574 kg | 1263 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4660 mm | 4240 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1800 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1340 mm | 1490 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2660 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 6.4 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 59 L | 53 L |