2005 Land Rover Range Rover vs. 1996 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2005 Land Rover Range Rover is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 4,942 cc (8 cylinders), 1996 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Ford Mustang (212 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 37 more horse power than 2005 Land Rover Range Rover. (175 HP @ 2000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1996 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 2005 Land Rover Range Rover. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Land Rover Range Rover weights approximately 1030 kg more than 1996 Ford Mustang.
Because 2005 Land Rover Range Rover is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1996 Ford Mustang. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Land Rover Range Rover 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.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Land Rover Range Rover | 1996 Ford Mustang | |
Make | Land Rover | Ford |
Model | Range Rover | Mustang |
Year Released | 2005 | 1996 |
Body Type | SUV | Convertible |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2926 cc | 4942 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 175 HP | 212 HP |
Engine RPM | 2000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 2500 kg | 1470 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4960 mm | 4660 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1960 mm | 1860 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1870 mm | 1360 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2580 mm |