Compare Ford Mustang 5 Convertible vs Ford Focus CC vs Chrysler 200 Convertible
Variants
Mustang
Mustang GT 304
Mustang GT 324
Mustang GT 324 AT
Mustang GT 500 507
Mustang GT 500 558
Mustang GT 500 672
1.6 Duratec
2.0 Duratec AT
2.0 TDCi
2.4
3.6
Capacity
Cargo Capacity
275 L / 9.7 cu-ft
238 L / 8.4 cu-ft ~ 534 L / 18.9 cu-ft
Fuel Capacity
55.0 L / 14.5 gal
64.0 L / 16.9 gal
Passengers
4
4
4
Chassis
Brakes | Front
Ventilated discs
Brakes | Rear
Disc
Suspension | Front
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
Suspension | Rear
Solid axle
Multi-link
Multi-link
Tire Size
205/55R16
Turning Circle
11.3 m / 37.0 ft
Construction
Body Style
2-door Convertible
2-door Convertible
2-door Convertible
Dimensions
Size | Height
1456 mm / 57.3 in
1470 mm / 57.9 in
Size | Length
4509 mm / 177.5 in
4947 mm / 194.8 in
Size | Width
1877 mm / 73.9 in
1834 mm / 72.2 in
1843 mm / 72.6 in
Track Width | Front
1567.0 mm / 61.7 in
Track Width | Rear
1594.0 mm / 62.8 in
Wheelbase
2720 mm / 107.1 in
2640 mm / 103.9 in
2765 mm / 108.9 in
Performance
Acceleration | 0 - 100 km/h
11.9 sec
Acceleration | 0 - 60 mph
11.3 sec
Coefficient Of Drag
0.38
0.34
Fuel Economy
8.3 L/100km / 28.3 MPG (combined) | 11.8 L/100km / 19.9 MPG (urban) | 6.3 L/100km / 37.3 MPG (highway)
Top Speed
198.0 km/h / 123.0 mph
Towing Capacity
454 kg / 1001 lbs (w/o brakes)
Powertrain
Drivetrain Layout
Front-engine (longitudinal), Rear-wheel drive
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Emission Standard
Euro 4
Euro 4
Engine | Bore
87.5 mm / 3.4 in
Engine | Compression Ratio
10.8:1
Engine | Displacement
2.0 L / 122.0 cu-in / 1999.0 cc
Engine | Specific Output
72.5 hp/L / 1.2 hp/cu-in
Engine | Stroke
83.1 mm / 3.3 in
Engine | Torque
190 Nm / 140.1 lb-ft @ 4500 rpm
Transmission | Gears
4-speed
6-speed
Transmission | Type
Automatic
Automatic
Production
Availability
2006 ~ 2010
2011 ~ 2014
Reviews
Neofiliac score
73%
25%
45%
Pros
- Great V8 choices
- Good drivetrain reliability
- Improved sporty styling
- Decent drivetrain reliability
- Hardtop convertible
- Better styled than the Sebring
- Decent drivetrain
- Good comfort
Cons
- High 0.38 drag coefficient
- Basic suspension setup
- Slow and sluggish
- Miserably low engine output
- Awkward styling
- Stuck with MacPherson struts in the front
- Bad handling
- Quite front-heavy
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.