2010 Suzuki Equator vs. 1996 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2010 Suzuki Equator is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 4,942 cc (8 cylinders), 1996 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Ford Mustang (212 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 62 more horse power than 2010 Suzuki Equator. (150 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1996 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 2010 Suzuki Equator. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Ford Mustang weights approximately 495 kg more than 2010 Suzuki Equator. 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2010 Suzuki Equator | 1996 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | Suzuki | Ford |
| Model | Equator | Mustang |
| Year Released | 2010 | 1996 |
| Body Type | Pickup | Convertible |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2501 cc | 4942 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 150 HP | 212 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 975 kg | 1470 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5250 mm | 4660 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1860 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1790 mm | 1360 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3200 mm | 2580 mm |
