2009 Chevrolet TrailBlazer vs. 1985 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2009 Chevrolet TrailBlazer is newer by 24 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1985 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1985 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 4,161 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Chevrolet TrailBlazer is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Chevrolet TrailBlazer (281 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 106 more horse power than 1985 Ford Mustang. (175 HP @ 4400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Chevrolet TrailBlazer should accelerate faster than 1985 Ford Mustang. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Chevrolet TrailBlazer weights approximately 369 kg more than 1985 Ford Mustang. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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, 1985 Ford Mustang (285 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 9 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Chevrolet TrailBlazer. (276 Nm @ 4600 RPM). This means 1985 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Chevrolet TrailBlazer.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Chevrolet TrailBlazer | 1985 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Ford |
| Model | TrailBlazer | Mustang |
| Year Released | 2009 | 1985 |
| Body Type | SUV | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4161 cc | 2301 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 281 HP | 175 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4400 RPM |
| Torque | 276 Nm | 285 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4600 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.3:1 | 8.0:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1549 kg | 1180 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4880 mm | 4560 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1850 mm | 1330 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2880 mm | 2500 mm |
