2009 Audi A3 vs. 2004 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2009 Audi A3 is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 4,605 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Ford Mustang (261 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 61 more horse power than 2009 Audi A3. (200 HP @ 5100 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 2009 Audi A3. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Ford Mustang weights approximately 488 kg more than 2009 Audi A3. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2004 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 2004 Ford Mustang. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Audi A3, 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, 2004 Ford Mustang (410 Nm) has 129 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Audi A3. (281 Nm). This means 2004 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Audi A3.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Audi A3 | 2004 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | Audi | Ford |
| Model | A3 | Mustang |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2004 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1983 cc | 4605 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 200 HP | 261 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5100 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 281 Nm | 410 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 82.6 mm | 90 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 92.8 mm | 90 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.5:1 | 9.4:1 |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 3 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1030 kg | 1518 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4290 mm | 4660 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1970 mm | 1860 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1360 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2580 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 8.4 L/100km | 9.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 10.7 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 9.8 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 59 L |
