2009 Ford Mustang vs. 2004 MCC Silverpulse
To start off, 2009 Ford Mustang is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 MCC Silverpulse. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 MCC Silverpulse would be higher. At 4,606 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine.
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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Ford Mustang | 2004 MCC Silverpulse | |
| Make | Ford | MCC |
| Model | Mustang | Silverpulse |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2004 |
| Engine Position | Front | Rear |
| Engine Size | 4606 cc | 699 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 2 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 300 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 3 doors |
