2004 Ford Mustang vs. 2012 Saab 03-Sep
To start off, 2012 Saab 03-Sep 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, 2004 Ford Mustang (261 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 41 more horse power than 2012 Saab 03-Sep. (220 HP @ 5300 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 2012 Saab 03-Sep. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Saab 03-Sep weights approximately 167 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, 2012 Saab 03-Sep, 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 61 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Saab 03-Sep. (349 Nm). This means 2004 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Saab 03-Sep.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Ford Mustang | 2012 Saab 03-Sep | |
Make | Ford | Saab |
Model | Mustang | 03-Sep |
Year Released | 2004 | 2012 |
Body Type | Coupe | Convertible |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4605 cc | 2000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 261 HP | 220 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5300 RPM |
Torque | 410 Nm | 349 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1518 kg | 1685 kg |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.4 L/100km | 7.1 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 59 L | 61 L |