2009 Chevrolet Equinox vs. 1996 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2009 Chevrolet Equinox is newer by 13 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 27 more horse power than 2009 Chevrolet Equinox. (185 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1996 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 2009 Chevrolet Equinox. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Ford Mustang weights approximately 204 kg more than 2009 Chevrolet Equinox. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2009 Chevrolet Equinox 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, 2009 Chevrolet Equinox 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:
2009 Chevrolet Equinox | 1996 Ford Mustang | |
Make | Chevrolet | Ford |
Model | Equinox | Mustang |
Year Released | 2009 | 1996 |
Body Type | SUV | Convertible |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3425 cc | 4942 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 185 HP | 212 HP |
Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1266 kg | 1470 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4800 mm | 4660 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1860 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1710 mm | 1360 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2860 mm | 2580 mm |