2005 Dodge Durango vs. 2012 Ford Shelby GT500
To start off, 2012 Ford Shelby GT500 is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Dodge Durango. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Dodge Durango would be higher. At 5,400 cc (8 cylinders), 2012 Ford Shelby GT500 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Ford Shelby GT500 (550 HP @ 6200 RPM) has 320 more horse power than 2005 Dodge Durango. (230 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Ford Shelby GT500 should accelerate faster than 2005 Dodge Durango. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Dodge Durango weights approximately 595 kg more than 2012 Ford Shelby GT500.
Because 2005 Dodge Durango is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2012 Ford Shelby GT500. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Dodge Durango 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 Ford Shelby GT500 (691 Nm) has 298 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Dodge Durango. (393 Nm). This means 2012 Ford Shelby GT500 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Dodge Durango.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Dodge Durango | 2012 Ford Shelby GT500 | |
| Make | Dodge | Ford |
| Model | Durango | Shelby GT500 |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2012 |
| Body Type | SUV | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4701 cc | 5400 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 230 HP | 550 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 6200 RPM |
| Torque | 393 Nm | 691 Nm |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 7 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2328 kg | 1733 kg |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 13.1 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 16.8 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 102 L | 61 L |
