2004 Ford Mustang vs. 2012 Chevrolet Camaro
To start off, 2012 Chevrolet Camaro 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 6,200 cc (8 cylinders), 2012 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Chevrolet Camaro (580 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 390 more horse power than 2004 Ford Mustang. (190 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Chevrolet Camaro should accelerate faster than 2004 Ford Mustang.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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 Chevrolet Camaro (753 Nm) has 455 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Ford Mustang. (298 Nm). This means 2012 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Ford Mustang.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Ford Mustang | 2012 Chevrolet Camaro | |
Make | Ford | Chevrolet |
Model | Mustang | Camaro |
Year Released | 2004 | 2012 |
Body Type | Coupe | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3801 cc | 6200 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 190 HP | 580 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 298 Nm | 753 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4660 mm | 4836 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1918 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1389 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2852 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 8.1 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 11.8 L/100km | 16.8 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 59 L | 72 L |