Compare Rolls-Royce Corniche V vs Ford Mustang 4 Convertible vs Chevrolet Camaro 4 Convertible
Variants
3.8 147
3.8 190
3.8 GT 152
4.6 Cobra R
4.6 Cobra
4.6 GT 215
4.6 GT 228
4.6 GT 263
5.0 GT
3.4
3.4 AT
3.8 193
3.8 203
3.8 203 AT
5.7 279
5.7 279 AT
5.7 344 AT
Z28
Z28 AT
Capacity
Cargo Capacity
187 L / 6.6 cu-ft
215 L / 7.6 cu-ft
Engine Oil Capacity
4.7 L / 5.0 qt
Fuel Capacity
100.0 L / 26.4 gal
Passengers
4
4
4
Payload
365 kg / 805 lbs
Chassis
Brakes | Front
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Brakes | Rear
Disc
Disc
Power Steering
Hydraulic Steering
Hydraulic Steering
Hydraulic Steering
Suspension | Front
Double-wishbone
MacPherson strut
Double-wishbone
Suspension | Rear
Double-wishbone
Solid axle
Solid axle
Tire Size
225/55 R17 W
Construction
Body Style
2-door Convertible
2-door Convertible
2-door Convertible
Dimensions
Size | Height
1475 mm / 58.1 in
Size | Length
5405 mm / 212.8 in
Size | Width
1910 mm / 75.2 in
Track Width | Front
1549.0 mm / 61.0 in
Track Width | Rear
1549.0 mm / 61.0 in
Weight
2735.0 kg / 6029.6 lbs
Wheel Size
17 in
16 in
Wheelbase
3061 mm / 120.5 in
Performance
Acceleration | 0 - 100 km/h
8.5 sec
Acceleration | 0 - 60 mph
8.1 sec
Fuel Economy
19.1 L/100km / 12.3 MPG (combined) | 27.5 L/100km / 8.6 MPG (urban) | 14.2 L/100km / 16.6 MPG (highway)
Top Speed
225.0 km/h / 139.8 mph
Powertrain
Drivetrain Layout
Front-engine (longitudinal), Rear-wheel drive
Front-engine (longitudinal), Rear-wheel drive
Front-engine (longitudinal), Rear-wheel drive
Engine | Bore
104.1 mm / 4.1 in
Engine | Compression Ratio
8.0:1
Engine | Displacement
6.7 L / 411.8 cu-in / 6748.0 cc
Engine | Power
329.0 hp / 245.3 kW @ 4000 rpm
Engine | Specific Output
48.8 hp/L / 0.8 hp/cu-in
Engine | Stroke
99.1 mm / 3.9 in
Engine | Torque
738 Nm / 544.3 lb-ft @ 2100 rpm
Engine | Type
Turbocharged multi-port injected petrol V8 engine with 2 values per cylinder
Transmission | Gears
4-speed
Transmission | Type
Automatic
Production
Availability
2000 ~ 2002
Reviews
Neofiliac score
81%
69%
72%
Pros
- Exceptionally luxurious
- Elegant, though dated styling
- Good reliability record
- Good engine reliability
- Decent build quality
- Easy to work on
Cons
- Bad 0-100kph time
- Very high fuel consumption
- Lethargic handling
- Basic suspension setup
- Low cargo capacity
- Down on power
- Inefficient
- Dated styling
Remove
Remove
Remove
Add up to 4 products to the comparison using the search bar above
Information on this page is provided on an as-is basis. No warranty on accuracy is implied. This page may contain affiliate links to third-party merchants such as Amazon and eBay. If you make a purchase using the supplied link, we may receive a commission. Neofiliac places the utmost respect for your privacy. We use no cookie whatsoever beyond that needed for the proper functioning of the website.