Ford Mustang VI · Facelift 2017
Car comparison
Ford Mustang VI · Facelift 2017 GT/CS 5.0 V8vsMercedes-Benz EQS (V297) · Facelift 2024 AMG EQS 53 125 kWh
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonMercedes-Benz EQS (V297) · Facelift 2024
AMG EQS 53 125 kWh
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Mercedes-Benz EQS (V297) Facelift 2024 AMG EQS 53 125 kWh
- Quickest 0-100 km/h3.8 s
- Most powerful658 hp491 kW
- Highest torque950 Nm701 lb-ft
- Largest trunk620 L
- Best overall score82/100
- Best performance score81/100
- Best practicality score85/100
Ford Mustang VI Facelift 2017 GT/CS 5.0 V8
- Fastest top speed249 km/h155 mph
- Lightest1,682 kg3,708 lb
- Best power-to-weight268 hp/t200 kW/t3.7 kg/hp
- Best economy score74/100
Specification comparison
| Model | FordMustang VIFacelift 2017GT/CS 5.0 V8 | Mercedes-BenzEQS (V297)Facelift 2024AMG EQS 53 125 kWh |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 450hp336kW | 658hp491kW |
| Torque | 529Nm390lb-ft | 950Nm701lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,682kg3,708lb | 2,640kg5,820lb |
| Gross weight | 2,105kg4,641lb | 3,225kg7,110lb |
| Top speed | 249 km/h 155 mph | Unrestricted 230 km/h143 mph Restricted 220 km/h137 mph Calculated |
| To 99% top speed | 54.8s99% target: 247 km/h / 153 mph Calculated | 45.8s99% target: 228 km/h / 141 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 4.3s | 3.8s |
| 0-200 km/h | 16.4s Calculated | 17.3s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 4.1s Calculated | 3.6s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 12.4L/100 km19mpg US22.8mpg UK | - |
| Fuel consumption city | 15.7L/100 km15mpg US18.0mpg UK | - |
| Fuel consumption highway | 9.8L/100 km24mpg US28.8mpg UK | - |
| Quarter mile | 12.5s Calculated | 12.1s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 268hp/t200kW/t121hp/1000 lb Calculated | 249hp/t186kW/t113hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 315Nm/t210lb-ft/ton Calculated | 360Nm/t241lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 492km306mi Calculated | - |
| Displacement | 5,038cc307cu in | - |
| Length | 4,789mm189in | 5,223mm206in |
| Width | 1,916mm75in | 1,926mm76in |
| Height | 1,382mm54in | 1,520mm60in |
| Wheelbase | 2,720mm107in | 3,210mm126in |
| Front track | 1,642mm65in | 1,660mm65in |
| Rear track | 1,642mm65in | 1,653mm65in |
| Ground clearance | 144mm6in | 139mm5in |
| Trunk volume | 408L | 620L |
| Max trunk volume | - | 1,700L |
| Doors | 2 | 5 |
| Seats | 4 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 61L | - |
Performance charts
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | FordMustang VIFacelift 2017GT/CS 5.0 V8 | Mercedes-BenzEQS (V297)Facelift 2024AMG EQS 53 125 kWh |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 4.1 s | 3.6 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 4.3 s | 3.8 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 16.4 s | 17.3 s |
| Top speed | 249 km/h 155 mph | Unrestricted 230 km/h143 mph Restricted 220 km/h137 mph Limited |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.0 s | 1.9 s |
330 ft 101 m | 5.4 s | 5.1 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 8.1 s | 7.7 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 10.5 s | 10.1 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 12.5 s | 12.1 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 180 km/h 112 mph | 179 km/h 111 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordMustang VIFacelift 2017GT/CS 5.0 V8 | 450 hp 336 kW |
| Mercedes-BenzEQS (V297)Facelift 2024AMG EQS 53 125 kWh | 658 hp 491 kW |
Mercedes-Benz EQS (V297) Facelift 2024 AMG EQS 53 125 kWh has 208 hp more than Ford Mustang VI Facelift 2017 GT/CS 5.0 V8.
The biggest power difference is between Ford Mustang VI Facelift 2017 GT/CS 5.0 V8 and Mercedes-Benz EQS (V297) Facelift 2024 AMG EQS 53 125 kWh: 208 hp (155 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordMustang VIFacelift 2017GT/CS 5.0 V8 | 529 Nm 390 lb-ft |
| Mercedes-BenzEQS (V297)Facelift 2024AMG EQS 53 125 kWh | 950 Nm 701 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordMustang VIFacelift 2017GT/CS 5.0 V8 | 1,682 kg 3,708 lb |
| Mercedes-BenzEQS (V297)Facelift 2024AMG EQS 53 125 kWh | 2,640 kg 5,820 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordMustang VIFacelift 2017GT/CS 5.0 V8 | 249 km/h 155 mph |
| Mercedes-BenzEQS (V297)Facelift 2024AMG EQS 53 125 kWh | Unrestricted 230 km/h143 mph Restricted 220 km/h137 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordMustang VIFacelift 2017GT/CS 5.0 V8 | 4.3 s |
| Mercedes-BenzEQS (V297)Facelift 2024AMG EQS 53 125 kWh | 3.8 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Mercedes-Benz EQS (V297) Facelift 2024 AMG EQS 53 125 kWh and Ford Mustang VI Facelift 2017 GT/CS 5.0 V8: 0.5 s.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordMustang VIFacelift 2017GT/CS 5.0 V8 | 268 hp/t 200 kW/t 3.7 kg/hp |
| Mercedes-BenzEQS (V297)Facelift 2024AMG EQS 53 125 kWh | 249 hp/t 186 kW/t 4.0 kg/hp |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| FordMustang VIFacelift 2017GT/CS 5.0 V8 | 450 hp 336 kW | 4.3 s | 249 km/h 155 mph |
| Mercedes-BenzEQS (V297)Facelift 2024AMG EQS 53 125 kWh | 658 hp 491 kW | 3.8 s | Unrestricted 230 km/h143 mph Restricted 220 km/h137 mph |
Most attractive quadrant
Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Practicality score | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FordMustang VIFacelift 2017GT/CS 5.0 V8 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| Mercedes-BenzEQS (V297)Facelift 2024AMG EQS 53 125 kWh |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | FordMustang VIFacelift 2017GT/CS 5.0 V8 | Mercedes-BenzEQS (V297)Facelift 2024AMG EQS 53 125 kWh | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 450 hp 336 kW | 658 hp 491 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 529 Nm 390 lb-ft | 950 Nm 701 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 4.3 s | 3.8 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 249 km/h 155 mph | Unrestricted 230 km/h143 mph Restricted 220 km/h137 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,682 kg 3,708 lb | 2,640 kg 5,820 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 12.4 L/100 km 19.0 mpg US 22.8 mpg UK | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 492 km 306 mi | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 408 L 14.4 cu ft | 620 L 21.9 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 268 hp/t 200 kW/t 3.7 kg/hp | 249 hp/t 186 kW/t 4.0 kg/hp | ||||||||||||||||
| Overall | Fixed score | Fixed score |
Fuel cost and annual usage
Estimate running costs from combined consumption, your annual distance, and the fuel price in your local currency.
Enter the fuel price in your local currency, for example €/L, $/gal, £/L or any other local currency.
LC = Local Currency
| Vehicle | Ford Mustang VI Facelift 2017 GT/CS 5.0 V8 |
|---|---|
| Consumption | 12.4 L/100 km19 mpg US22.8 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 21.70 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 34.92 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,860 L491 US gal409 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 3,255 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Ford Mustang VI Facelift 2017 GT/CS 5.0 V8
- Is 958 kg lighter
- Has 19 km/h (12 mph) higher top speed
- Has 18 hp/t better power-to-weight
Pros
- Highest top speed
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Lowest power
- Smallest trunk
Mercedes-Benz EQS (V297) Facelift 2024 AMG EQS 53 125 kWh
- Has 208 hp more
- Has 421 Nm more
- Is 0.5 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 212 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Heaviest
- Lowest top speed
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























