2009 Suzuki Equator vs. 2004 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2009 Suzuki Equator is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 4,606 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Ford Mustang (296 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 35 more horse power than 2009 Suzuki Equator. (261 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 2009 Suzuki Equator. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Ford Mustang weights approximately 367 kg more than 2009 Suzuki Equator. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2009 Suzuki Equator is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2004 Ford Mustang. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Suzuki Equator 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, 2004 Ford Mustang (427 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 46 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Suzuki Equator. (381 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2004 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Suzuki Equator.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Suzuki Equator | 2004 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | Suzuki | Ford |
| Model | Equator | Mustang |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2004 |
| Body Type | Pickup | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3953 cc | 4606 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 3 valves |
| Horse Power | 261 HP | 296 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 381 Nm | 427 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.5:1 | 9.8:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1295 kg | 1662 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5600 mm | 4770 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1880 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1790 mm | 1390 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3560 mm | 2620 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 7.2 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 80 L | 59 L |
