Ford Mustang 1994 vs Nissan 200 SX 1994
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 3.8 - 4.6 | 2.0 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 147 - 305 HP | 200 HP | |
| Torque: | 292 - 407 NM | 265 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.3 seconds | 7.5 - 8.3 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.3 - 11.3 | 8.8 - 9.3 | |
|
Ford Mustang petrol engines consumes on average 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than Nissan 200 SX. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.62 m | 4.52 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.73 m | |
| Height: | 1.34 m | 1.30 m | |
|
Ford Mustang is larger. Ford Mustang is 10 cm longer than the Nissan 200 SX, 9 cm wider, while the height of Ford Mustang is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 307 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.7 meters | 9.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Mustang is 2.1 metres more than that of the Nissan 200 SX, which means Ford Mustang can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | ~ 1`780 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 6200 | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Nissan 200 SX has
| |