2006 Dodge Charger vs. 2009 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2009 Ford Mustang is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Dodge Charger. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Dodge Charger would be higher. At 5,654 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Dodge Charger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Ford Mustang (395 HP @ 5300 RPM) has 55 more horse power than 2006 Dodge Charger. (340 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 2006 Dodge Charger.
Because 2006 Dodge Charger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Ford Mustang. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Dodge Charger 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, 2006 Dodge Charger (529 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 289 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Ford Mustang. (240 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 2006 Dodge Charger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Ford Mustang.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Dodge Charger | 2009 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | Dodge | Ford |
| Model | Charger | Mustang |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5654 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 | 5000 RPM | 5300 RPM |
| Torque | 529 Nm | 240 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 3500 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.6:1 | 9.8:1 |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5090 mm | 4780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1480 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 |
