2005 Ford Mustang vs. 2012 Chevrolet Malibu
To start off, 2012 Chevrolet Malibu is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 4,015 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Chevrolet Malibu (252 HP @ 6300 RPM) has 42 more horse power than 2005 Ford Mustang. (210 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Chevrolet Malibu should accelerate faster than 2005 Ford Mustang.
Because 2005 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 2005 Ford Mustang. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Chevrolet Malibu, 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, 2012 Chevrolet Malibu (340 Nm) has 30 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Ford Mustang. (310 Nm). This means 2012 Chevrolet Malibu will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Ford Mustang.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Ford Mustang | 2012 Chevrolet Malibu | |
Make | Ford | Chevrolet |
Model | Mustang | Malibu |
Year Released | 2005 | 2012 |
Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4015 cc | 3600 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 210 HP | 252 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6300 RPM |
Torque | 310 Nm | 340 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4770 mm | 4872 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1786 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1390 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2840 mm | 2852 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 8.4 L/100km | 9.1 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 12.4 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 61 L |