2004 Ford Mustang vs. 2010 Chevrolet Epica
To start off, 2010 Chevrolet Epica is newer by 6 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 (261 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 107 more horse power than 2010 Chevrolet Epica. (154 HP @ 5800 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 2010 Chevrolet Epica. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Chevrolet Epica weights approximately 57 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, 2010 Chevrolet Epica, 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 (410 Nm) has 173 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Chevrolet Epica. (237 Nm). This means 2004 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Chevrolet Epica.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Ford Mustang | 2010 Chevrolet Epica | |
Make | Ford | Chevrolet |
Model | Mustang | Epica |
Year Released | 2004 | 2010 |
Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4605 cc | 2490 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 261 HP | 154 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5800 RPM |
Torque | 410 Nm | 237 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 90 mm | 77 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 90 mm | 89.2 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.4:1 | 9.8:1 |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 6 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1518 kg | 1575 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4660 mm | 4810 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1820 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1460 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2710 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 9.3 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 59 L | 63 L |