2004 Ford Mustang vs. 2012 Audi R8
To start off, 2012 Audi R8 is newer by 8 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, 2012 Audi R8 (420 HP) has 159 more horse power than 2004 Ford Mustang. (261 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Audi R8 should accelerate faster than 2004 Ford Mustang.
Because 2012 Audi R8 is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2004 Ford Mustang. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Audi R8 will offer significantly more control. 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, 2012 Audi R8 (430 Nm) has 20 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Ford Mustang. (410 Nm). This means 2012 Audi R8 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Ford Mustang.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Ford Mustang | 2012 Audi R8 | |
Make | Ford | Audi |
Model | Mustang | R8 |
Year Released | 2004 | 2012 |
Body Type | Coupe | Convertible |
Engine Position | Front | Middle |
Engine Size | 4605 cc | 4200 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 261 HP | 420 HP |
Torque | 410 Nm | 430 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | AWD |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4660 mm | 4435 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1905 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1245 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2649 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 9.4 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 21.4 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 59 L | 90 L |