2005 Ford Mustang vs. 1963 Triumph 2000
To start off, 2005 Ford Mustang is newer by 42 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Triumph 2000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Triumph 2000 would be higher. At 4,015 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Ford Mustang (202 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 113 more horse power than 1963 Triumph 2000. (89 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1963 Triumph 2000. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Ford Mustang weights approximately 327 kg more than 1963 Triumph 2000. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2005 Ford Mustang (326 Nm) has 168 more torque (in Nm) than 1963 Triumph 2000. (158 Nm). This means 2005 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1963 Triumph 2000.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Ford Mustang | 1963 Triumph 2000 | |
Make | Ford | Triumph |
Model | Mustang | 2000 |
Year Released | 2005 | 1963 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4015 cc | 1998 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 202 HP | 89 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Torque | 326 Nm | 158 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 100 mm | 74.8 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 84 mm | 76 mm |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1497 kg | 1170 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4770 mm | 4420 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1660 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1390 mm | 1430 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 2700 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 64 L |