2009 Ford Mustang vs. 1976 Volvo 260
To start off, 2009 Ford Mustang is newer by 33 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1976 Volvo 260. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1976 Volvo 260 would be higher. At 4,600 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Ford Mustang (395 HP @ 5300 RPM) has 247 more horse power than 1976 Volvo 260. (148 HP @ 5700 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1976 Volvo 260.
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, 2009 Ford Mustang (240 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 22 more torque (in Nm) than 1976 Volvo 260. (218 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2009 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1976 Volvo 260.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Ford Mustang | 1976 Volvo 260 | |
| Make | Ford | Volvo |
| Model | Mustang | 260 |
| Year Released | 2009 | 1976 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4600 cc | 2664 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 3 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 395 HP | 148 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5300 RPM | 5700 RPM |
| Torque | 240 Nm | 218 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.8:1 | 9.5:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 4780 mm | 4890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1440 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2740 mm | 2660 mm |
