2005 Chrysler 300 vs. 2009 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2009 Ford Mustang is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Chrysler 300. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Chrysler 300 would be higher. At 5,653 cc (8 cylinders), 2005 Chrysler 300 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Ford Mustang (395 HP @ 5300 RPM) has 55 more horse power than 2005 Chrysler 300. (340 HP @ 6400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 2005 Chrysler 300.
Let's talk about torque, 2005 Chrysler 300 (529 Nm) has 289 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Ford Mustang. (240 Nm). This means 2005 Chrysler 300 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Ford Mustang.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Chrysler 300 | 2009 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | Chrysler | Ford |
| Model | 300 | Mustang |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5653 cc | 4600 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 3 valves |
| Horse Power | 340 HP | 395 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 5300 RPM |
| Torque | 529 Nm | 240 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.6:1 | 9.8:1 |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5010 mm | 4780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1490 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3050 mm | 2740 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.4 L/100km | 9.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 72 L | 55 L |
