2012 Ford Mustang GT

2012 Ford Mustang Competitors

$23-54k sports car, designed & built in U.S.A. 15-19 city / 23-29 hwy 240-464 mile range, gas engine
305 to 550 hp 225 cu. in. V6 to 329 cu. in. V8 supercharged 12.7 s s @ 111.3 mph mph 0-60 in 4.4 seconds, maximum lateral acceleration 0.88 g

As well as being compared against other sports cars, the 2012 Ford Mustang GT is also often compared to super cars, luxury cars, cars and mid-size SUVs. The 2012 Ford Mustang GT's top rivals come from Dodge (such as the Challenger R/T and the Charger R/T) and Chevrolet (such as the Camaro SS and the Impala LT)

compared to sports car competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Mustang GT compared to other sports car competitors include: it is slightly more powerful (412 HP @ 6,500 RPM vs 158 HP @ 6,700 RPM), slightly faster 0-60 time (4.4 seconds vs 7.0 seconds), much shorter braking distance from 60mph (104 ft vs 129 ft), slightly faster 1/4 mile time (12.7 s s @ 111.3 mph mph vs 15.4 s s @ 91.0 mph mph) and is slightly sportier (8.7 lb/hp vs 16.6 lb/hp).

However, on average it gets slightly less from a tank of gas in the city (272 miles vs 306 miles), has slightly less spacious back seats (30.9 ft3 vs 38.0 ft3), has rougher suspension (live vs independent), doesn't have power seats (not available vs standard) and doesn't have leather (not available vs standard).

2011 Dodge Challenger R/T

2011 Dodge Challenger R/T
$30,720

Significant advantages of the Challenger R/T (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Smoother suspension: Independent vs Live
  • Roomier back seats: 38.0 ft3 vs 30.9 ft3
  • Roomier front seats: 55.6 ft3 vs 52.2 ft3

Significant disadvantages of the Challenger R/T (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Much longer braking distance from 60mph: 142 ft vs 104 ft
  • Significantly wider turning radius: 38.1 ft vs 33.4 ft
  • Premium radio not available

common strengths of the Challenger R/T and Mustang GT

  • Inexpensive: $30,720 vs $30,105
  • Both have a rear seat that folds down for extra storage space
  • Both have rear spoilers
arrow Compare the 2011 Dodge Challenger R/T vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

2011 Dodge Charger R/T

2011 Dodge Charger R/T
$31,220

Significant advantages of the Charger R/T (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Much roomier back seats: 49.2 ft3 vs 30.9 ft3
  • Roomier front seats: 55.6 ft3 vs 52.2 ft3
  • Passenger power seats comes standard

Significant disadvantages of the Charger R/T (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Worse cornering ability: 0.81 g vs 0.88 g
  • Wider turning radius: 37.7 ft vs 33.4 ft
  • Premium radio not available

common strengths of the Charger R/T and Mustang GT

  • Inexpensive: $31,220 vs $30,105
  • Both have a rear seat that folds down for extra storage space
  • Number of rows of seating: 2 vs 2
arrow Compare the 2011 Dodge Charger R/T vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

2011 Chevrolet Camaro SS

2011 Chevrolet Camaro SS
$31,920

Significant advantages of the Camaro SS (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Smoother suspension: Independent vs Live
  • Power seats comes standard
  • Optional leather

Significant disadvantages of the Camaro SS (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Much longer braking distance from 60mph: 129 ft vs 104 ft
  • Premium radio not available

common strengths of the Camaro SS and Mustang GT

  • Fairly powerful: 426 HP @ 5,900 RPM vs 412 HP @ 6,500 RPM
  • Inexpensive: $31,920 vs $30,105
  • Both provide sporty handling: 9.1 lb/hp vs 8.7 lb/hp
arrow Compare the 2011 Chevrolet Camaro SS vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

2011 Subaru Impreza WRX STI Limited

2011 Subaru Impreza WRX STI Limited
$38,070

Significant advantages of the Impreza WRX STI Limited (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Impreza WRX STI Limited's Turbocharger increases power output: Turbocharger vs None
  • Smoother suspension: Independent vs Live
  • Significantly roomier back seats: 38.6 ft3 vs 30.9 ft3

Significant disadvantages of the Impreza WRX STI Limited (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Significantly longer braking distance from 60mph: 125 ft vs 104 ft
  • Less powerful: 305 HP @ 6,000 RPM vs 412 HP @ 6,500 RPM
  • Premium radio not available

common strengths of the Impreza WRX STI Limited and Mustang GT

  • Inexpensive: $38,070 vs $30,105
  • Both have a rear seat that folds down for extra storage space
  • Number of rows of seating: 2 vs 2
arrow Compare the 2011 Subaru Impreza WRX STI Limited vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

2011 MINI Cooper

2011 MINI Cooper
$20,100

Significant advantages of the Cooper (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Smoother suspension: Independent vs Live
  • Significantly better highway mileage: 37 mpg vs 26 mpg
  • Significantly better city mileage: 29 mpg vs 17 mpg

Significant disadvantages of the Cooper (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Much less powerful: 121 HP @ 6,000 RPM vs 412 HP @ 6,500 RPM
  • Much slower 1/4 mile time: 17.0 s s @ 83.0 mph mph vs 12.7 s s @ 111.3 mph mph
  • Much slower 0-60 mph time: 9.1 seconds vs 4.4 seconds

common strengths of the Cooper and Mustang GT

  • Inexpensive: $20,100 vs $30,105
  • Both have a rear seat that folds down for extra storage space
  • Number of rows of seating: 2 vs 2
arrow Compare the 2011 MINI Cooper vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

2011 Mazda Miata MX-5 Grand Touring (Hard Top)

2011 Mazda Miata MX-5 Grand Touring (Hard Top)
$30,445

Significant advantages of the Miata MX-5 Grand Touring (Hard Top) (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Leather comes standard
  • CD changer comes standard

Significant disadvantages of the Miata MX-5 Grand Touring (Hard Top) (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Much less powerful: 158 HP @ 6,700 RPM vs 412 HP @ 6,500 RPM
  • Significantly longer braking distance from 60mph: 122 ft vs 104 ft
  • Significantly slower 1/4 mile time: 15.4 s s @ 91.0 mph mph vs 12.7 s s @ 111.3 mph mph

common strengths of the Miata MX-5 Grand Touring (Hard Top) and Mustang GT

  • Inexpensive: $30,445 vs $30,105
  • Both vehicles can make tight turns: 30.8 ft vs 33.4 ft
  • Both come standard with satellite radio
arrow Compare the 2011 Mazda Miata MX-5 Grand Touring (Hard Top) vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

compared to super car competitors

Generally, compared to super car competitors the Mustang GT doesn't have paddle shifters (not available vs standard), is much more sluggish (8.7 lb/hp vs 6.0 lb/hp), is much less powerful (412 HP @ 6,500 RPM vs 550 HP @ 8,000 RPM), only has a naturally-aspirated engine (none vs twin turbocharger) and significantly slower 0-60 time (4.4 seconds vs 3.4 seconds).

2010 Porsche 911 Turbo

2010 Porsche 911 Turbo
$133,750

Significant advantages of the 911 Turbo (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Much higher top speed: 194 mph vs 155 mph
  • Much faster 0-60 mph time: 3.0 seconds vs 4.4 seconds
  • Much faster 1/4 mile time: 11.2 s s @ 125.3 mph mph vs 12.7 s s @ 111.3 mph mph

Significant disadvantages of the 911 Turbo (vs the Mustang GT)

  • None found

common strengths of the 911 Turbo and Mustang GT

  • None found
arrow Compare the 2010 Porsche 911 Turbo vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

2011 Lamborghini Gallardo LP 550-2 Bicolore

2011 Lamborghini Gallardo LP 550-2 Bicolore
$196,995

Significant advantages of the Gallardo LP 550-2 Bicolore (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Much higher top speed: 199 mph vs 155 mph
  • Sportier performance: 5.5 lb/hp vs 8.7 lb/hp
  • Much more powerful: 550 HP @ 8,000 RPM vs 412 HP @ 6,500 RPM

Significant disadvantages of the Gallardo LP 550-2 Bicolore (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Significantly longer braking distance from 60mph: 112 ft vs 104 ft

common strengths of the Gallardo LP 550-2 Bicolore and Mustang GT

  • None found
arrow Compare the 2011 Lamborghini Gallardo LP 550-2 Bicolore vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

2010 Ferrari 458 Italia

2010 Ferrari 458 Italia
$230,675

Significant advantages of the 458 Italia (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Sportier performance: 5.3 lb/hp vs 8.7 lb/hp
  • Much higher top speed: 201 mph vs 155 mph
  • Much more powerful: 578 HP @ 9,000 RPM vs 412 HP @ 6,500 RPM

Significant disadvantages of the 458 Italia (vs the Mustang GT)

  • None found

common strengths of the 458 Italia and Mustang GT

  • None found
arrow Compare the 2010 Ferrari 458 Italia vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

2012 Audi R8 GT

2012 Audi R8 GT
$198,050

Significant advantages of the R8 GT (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Much more powerful: 560 HP @ 8,000 RPM vs 412 HP @ 6,500 RPM
  • Sportier performance: 6.0 lb/hp vs 8.7 lb/hp
  • Much better cornering ability: 1 g vs 0.88 g

Significant disadvantages of the R8 GT (vs the Mustang GT)

  • None found

common strengths of the R8 GT and Mustang GT

  • None found
arrow Compare the 2012 Audi R8 GT vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

2010 Dodge Viper SRT-10

2010 Dodge Viper SRT-10
$96,681

Significant advantages of the Viper SRT-10 (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Much more powerful: 600 HP @ 6,100 RPM vs 412 HP @ 6,500 RPM
  • Sportier performance: 5.8 lb/hp vs 8.7 lb/hp

Significant disadvantages of the Viper SRT-10 (vs the Mustang GT)

  • None found

common strengths of the Viper SRT-10 and Mustang GT

  • None found
arrow Compare the 2010 Dodge Viper SRT-10 vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

2012 Jaguar XKR

2012 Jaguar XKR
$104,375

Significant advantages of the XKR (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Much more powerful: 510 HP @ 6,000 RPM vs 412 HP @ 6,500 RPM
  • XKR's Supercharger increases power output: Supercharger vs None
  • Significantly higher top speed: 175 mph vs 155 mph

Significant disadvantages of the XKR (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Longer braking distance from 60mph: 111 ft vs 104 ft

common strengths of the XKR and Mustang GT

  • None found
arrow Compare the 2012 Jaguar XKR vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

compared to luxury car competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Mustang GT compared to luxury car competitors include: it is significantly sportier (8.7 lb/hp vs 15.4 lb/hp), is significantly more powerful (412 HP @ 6,500 RPM vs 230 HP @ 6,500 RPM), significantly tighter turning radius (33.4 ft vs 37.4 ft), significantly faster 0-60 time (4.4 seconds vs 6.5 seconds) and significantly shorter braking distance from 60mph (104 ft vs 134 ft).

However, on average it doesn't have rear air conditioning (not available vs optional), is slightly less fuel efficient in the city (17 mpg vs 21 mpg), lacks continously-variable transmission (traditional vs continuously variable), has slightly fewer seats (4 vs 5) and has significantly fewer airbags (3 vs 5).

2011 Audi A4 Premium

2011 Audi A4 Premium
$33,175

Significant advantages of the A4 Premium (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Smoother suspension: Independent vs Live
  • Optional rear air conditioning
  • Has continuously variable transmission: Continuously variable vs Traditional

Significant disadvantages of the A4 Premium (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Many fewer gears: Continuously variable vs 6
  • Much longer braking distance from 60mph: 140 ft vs 104 ft
  • Sluggish performance: 16.7 lb/hp vs 8.7 lb/hp

common strengths of the A4 Premium and Mustang GT

  • Inexpensive: $33,175 vs $30,105
  • A standard folding rear seat on the {better} is a great way to free up space for road trips; requires optional upgrade on the {worse}
  • Both have power outlets
arrow Compare the 2011 Audi A4 Premium vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

2011 Audi A5 Premium

2011 Audi A5 Premium
$39,075

Significant advantages of the A5 Premium (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Smoother suspension: Independent vs Live
  • Optional rear air conditioning
  • Much longer basic warranty: 50,000 mile vs 36,000 mile

Significant disadvantages of the A5 Premium (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Much slower 0-60 mph time: 8.0 seconds vs 4.4 seconds
  • Much slower 1/4 mile time: 16.2 s s @ 89.0 mph mph vs 12.7 s s @ 111.3 mph mph
  • Sluggish performance: 17.4 lb/hp vs 8.7 lb/hp

common strengths of the A5 Premium and Mustang GT

  • Inexpensive: $39,075 vs $30,105
  • Both have a rear seat that folds down for extra storage space
  • Both have power outlets
arrow Compare the 2011 Audi A5 Premium vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

2011 Audi TT

2011 Audi TT
$39,175

Significant advantages of the TT (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Smoother suspension: Independent vs Live
  • Much longer basic warranty: 50,000 mile vs 36,000 mile
  • Much longer-lasting basic warranty: 4 year vs 3 year

Significant disadvantages of the TT (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Sluggish performance: 15.4 lb/hp vs 8.7 lb/hp
  • Significantly less powerful: 211 HP @ 4,300 RPM vs 412 HP @ 6,500 RPM
  • Significantly more cramped front seats: 47.7 ft3 vs 52.2 ft3

common strengths of the TT and Mustang GT

  • Both vehicles can make tight turns: 35.9 ft vs 33.4 ft
  • Both vehicles have above average braking abilities for this class of vehicle: 115 ft vs 104 ft
  • Inexpensive: $39,175 vs $30,105
arrow Compare the 2011 Audi TT vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

2011 BMW 550i

2011 BMW 550i
$61,075

Significant advantages of the 550i (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Smoother suspension: Independent vs Live
  • Optional rear air conditioning
  • Much longer basic warranty: 50,000 mile vs 36,000 mile

Significant disadvantages of the 550i (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Worse highway mileage: 22 mpg vs 26 mpg
  • No rear spoiler
  • Premium radio must be bought separately

common strengths of the 550i and Mustang GT

  • Both posted zippy 1/4 mile times: 13.3 s s @ 106.9 mph mph vs 12.7 s s @ 111.3 mph mph
  • Both vehicles have above average braking abilities for this class of vehicle: 116 ft vs 104 ft
  • Both vehicles have good 0-60 times: 4.8 seconds vs 4.4 seconds
arrow Compare the 2011 BMW 550i vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

2011 Cadillac CTS 3.6

2011 Cadillac CTS 3.6
$42,605

Significant advantages of the CTS 3.6 (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Smoother suspension: Independent vs Live
  • Much longer basic warranty: 50,000 mile vs 36,000 mile
  • Much longer-lasting basic warranty: 4 year vs 3 year

Significant disadvantages of the CTS 3.6 (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Significantly slower 1/4 mile time: 14.9 s s @ 95.3 mph mph vs 12.7 s s @ 111.3 mph mph
  • Significantly slower 0-60 mph time: 6.5 seconds vs 4.4 seconds
  • Sluggish performance: 12.7 lb/hp vs 8.7 lb/hp

common strengths of the CTS 3.6 and Mustang GT

  • Both vehicles have above average braking abilities for this class of vehicle: 108 ft vs 104 ft
  • Inexpensive: $42,605 vs $30,105
  • Both come standard with satellite radio
arrow Compare the 2011 Cadillac CTS 3.6 vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

2011 BMW 328i

2011 BMW 328i
$37,475

Significant advantages of the 328i (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Smoother suspension: Independent vs Live
  • Much longer basic warranty: 50,000 mile vs 36,000 mile
  • Much longer-lasting basic warranty: 4 year vs 3 year

Significant disadvantages of the 328i (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Much slower 1/4 mile time: 16.0 s s @ 91.0 mph mph vs 12.7 s s @ 111.3 mph mph
  • Much longer braking distance from 60mph: 134 ft vs 104 ft
  • Sluggish performance: 15.7 lb/hp vs 8.7 lb/hp

common strengths of the 328i and Mustang GT

  • Both vehicles can make tight turns: 36.1 ft vs 33.4 ft
  • Inexpensive: $37,475 vs $30,105
  • A standard folding rear seat on the {better} is a great way to free up space for road trips; requires optional upgrade on the {worse}
arrow Compare the 2011 BMW 328i vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

compared to car competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Mustang GT compared to car competitors include: it is significantly sportier (8.7 lb/hp vs 17.9 lb/hp), is significantly more powerful (412 HP @ 6,500 RPM vs 200 HP @ 5,100 RPM), has slightly more gears (6 vs continuously variable), has better traction (rear-wheel drive vs front-wheel drive) and slightly tighter turning radius (33.4 ft vs 39.7 ft).

However, on average it is slightly less fuel efficient in the city (17 mpg vs 23 mpg), is slightly less fuel efficient on the highway (26 mpg vs 33 mpg), lacks continously-variable transmission (traditional vs continuously variable), has slightly fewer seats (4 vs 5) and has much fewer airbags (3 vs 5).

2011 Ford Taurus SHO

2011 Ford Taurus SHO
$38,950

Significant advantages of the Taurus SHO (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Smoother suspension: Independent vs Live
  • Much roomier back seats: 47.4 ft3 vs 30.9 ft3
  • Taurus SHO's Turbocharger increases power output: Turbocharger vs None

Significant disadvantages of the Taurus SHO (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Much longer braking distance from 60mph: 139 ft vs 104 ft
  • Significantly lower top speed: 115 mph vs 155 mph
  • Significantly wider turning radius: 39.7 ft vs 33.4 ft

common strengths of the Taurus SHO and Mustang GT

  • Both posted zippy 1/4 mile times: 13.7 s s @ 103.0 mph mph vs 12.7 s s @ 111.3 mph mph
  • Fairly powerful: 365 HP @ 5,500 RPM vs 412 HP @ 6,500 RPM
  • Both vehicles have good 0-60 times: 5.2 seconds vs 4.4 seconds
arrow Compare the Taurus SHO vs the Mustang GT

2012 Ford Fusion SE

2012 Ford Fusion SE
$23,625

Significant advantages of the Fusion SE (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Much roomier back seats: 45.9 ft3 vs 30.9 ft3
  • Many more airbags: 5 vs 3
  • Better highway mileage: 33 mpg vs 26 mpg

Significant disadvantages of the Fusion SE (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Much slower 1/4 mile time: 16.7 s s @ 85.0 mph mph vs 12.7 s s @ 111.3 mph mph
  • Much less powerful: 175 HP @ 6,000 RPM vs 412 HP @ 6,500 RPM
  • Sluggish performance: 18.8 lb/hp vs 8.7 lb/hp

common strengths of the Fusion SE and Mustang GT

  • Both have a rear seat that folds down for extra storage space
arrow Compare the Fusion SE vs the Mustang GT

2011 Volkswagen GTI 2.0T

2011 Volkswagen GTI 2.0T
$25,565

Significant advantages of the GTI 2.0T (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Smoother suspension: Independent vs Live
  • Many more airbags: 6 vs 3
  • GTI 2.0T's Turbocharger increases power output: Turbocharger vs None

Significant disadvantages of the GTI 2.0T (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Much longer braking distance from 60mph: 133 ft vs 104 ft
  • Much less powerful: 200 HP @ 5,100 RPM vs 412 HP @ 6,500 RPM
  • Significantly slower 1/4 mile time: 15.5 s s @ 94.0 mph mph vs 12.7 s s @ 111.3 mph mph

common strengths of the GTI 2.0T and Mustang GT

  • Both vehicles have good cornering ability: 0.91 g vs 0.88 g
  • Both have a rear seat that folds down for extra storage space
  • Both have rear spoilers
arrow Compare the 2011 Volkswagen GTI 2.0T vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

2012 Mitsubishi Eclipse GS

2012 Mitsubishi Eclipse GS
$20,274

Significant advantages of the Eclipse GS (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Smoother suspension: Independent vs Live
  • Much longer-lasting basic warranty: 5 year vs 3 year
  • Much longer basic warranty: 60,000 mile vs 36,000 mile

Significant disadvantages of the Eclipse GS (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Much longer braking distance from 60mph: 139 ft vs 104 ft
  • Much slower 1/4 mile time: 17.0 s s @ 83.0 mph mph vs 12.7 s s @ 111.3 mph mph
  • Sluggish performance: 20.2 lb/hp vs 8.7 lb/hp

common strengths of the Eclipse GS and Mustang GT

  • Both have a rear seat that folds down for extra storage space
  • Both have rear spoilers
arrow Compare the 2012 Mitsubishi Eclipse GS vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

2011 Honda Accord EX-L

2011 Honda Accord EX-L
$30,525

Significant advantages of the Accord EX-L (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Smoother suspension: Independent vs Live
  • Many fewer trips to fill-up when driving on the highway: 629 miles vs 416 miles
  • Many fewer trips to fill-up when driving in the city: 426 miles vs 272 miles

Significant disadvantages of the Accord EX-L (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Much slower 1/4 mile time: 16.6 s s @ 86.0 mph mph vs 12.7 s s @ 111.3 mph mph
  • Much slower 0-60 mph time: 8.9 seconds vs 4.4 seconds
  • Much less powerful: 190 HP @ 7,000 RPM vs 412 HP @ 6,500 RPM

common strengths of the Accord EX-L and Mustang GT

  • Both have a rear seat that folds down for extra storage space
  • Both come standard with satellite radio
arrow Compare the 2011 Honda Accord EX-L vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

2011 Nissan Maxima SV

2011 Nissan Maxima SV
$35,210

Significant advantages of the Maxima SV (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Smoother suspension: Independent vs Live
  • Has continuously variable transmission: Continuously variable vs Traditional
  • Many more airbags: 5 vs 3

Significant disadvantages of the Maxima SV (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Many fewer gears: Continuously variable vs 6
  • Much longer braking distance from 60mph: 128 ft vs 104 ft
  • Significantly slower 1/4 mile time: 14.7 s s @ 99.0 mph mph vs 12.7 s s @ 111.3 mph mph

common strengths of the Maxima SV and Mustang GT

  • Both posted zippy 1/4 mile times: 14.7 s s @ 99.0 mph mph vs 12.7 s s @ 111.3 mph mph
  • Both provide sporty handling: 12.3 lb/hp vs 8.7 lb/hp
  • Both vehicles have good 0-60 times: 6.2 seconds vs 4.4 seconds
arrow Compare the 2011 Nissan Maxima SV vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT

compared to mid-size SUV competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Mustang GT compared to mid-size SUV competitors include: it is much more powerful (412 HP @ 6,500 RPM vs 202 HP @ 5,200 RPM), is slightly more fuel efficient in the city (17 mpg vs 15 mpg), is significantly more fuel efficient on the highway (26 mpg vs 19 mpg), is much sportier (8.7 lb/hp vs 21.1 lb/hp) and has smoother suspension (independent vs live).

However, on average it has much less cargo space (13.4 ft3 vs 86.8 ft3), has slightly fewer seats (4 vs 5), gets significantly less from a tank of gas in the city (272 miles vs 338 miles), has slightly less spacious front seats (52.2 ft3 vs 54.7 ft3) and has much less spacious back seats (30.9 ft3 vs 49.4 ft3).

2011 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Sahara

Placeholder
$31,245

Significant advantages of the Wrangler Unlimited Sahara (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Much more cargo room: 86.8 ft3 vs 13.4 ft3
  • Much roomier back seats: 49.4 ft3 vs 30.9 ft3
  • Child door locks comes standard

Significant disadvantages of the Wrangler Unlimited Sahara (vs the Mustang GT)

  • Much less powerful: 202 HP @ 5,200 RPM vs 412 HP @ 6,500 RPM
  • Much longer braking distance from 60mph: 150 ft vs 104 ft
  • Rougher suspension: Live vs Independent

common strengths of the Wrangler Unlimited Sahara and Mustang GT

  • More gears: 6 vs 6
arrow Compare the 2011 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Sahara vs the 2012 Ford Mustang GT