2009 Dodge Dakota vs. 2006 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2009 Dodge Dakota is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 4,604 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Ford Mustang (300 HP @ 5750 RPM) has 89 more horse power than 2009 Dodge Dakota. (211 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 2009 Dodge Dakota. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Ford Mustang weights approximately 1165 kg more than 2009 Dodge Dakota. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2009 Dodge Dakota is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Ford Mustang. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Dodge Dakota 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 Ford Mustang (434 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 115 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Dodge Dakota. (319 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2006 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Dodge Dakota.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Dodge Dakota | 2006 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | Dodge | Ford |
| Model | Dakota | Mustang |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Pickup | Convertible |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3701 cc | 4604 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 211 HP | 300 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 5750 RPM |
| Torque | 319 Nm | 434 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 87.9 mm | 90.2 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 100 mm | 90 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.7:1 | 10.1:1 |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1691 kg | 2856 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5560 mm | 4770 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1750 mm | 1390 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3340 mm | 2730 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 13.1 L/100km | 9.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 16.8 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 15.7 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 83 L | 61 L |
