| 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
2012 Acura MDX and 2016 Ford Mustang Specifications
| Model Year | 2012 | 2016 | |
| Model | Acura MDX | Ford Mustang | |
| Engine | |||
| Transmission | |||
| Drivetrain | |||
| Body | 4dr SUV | 2dr Coupe | |
| Difference | |||
| Wheelbase | 2,751 mm | 2,720 mm | 0 mm |
| Length | 4,867 mm | 4,783 mm | 0 mm |
| Width | 1,994 mm | 1,915 mm | 0 mm |
| Height | 1,732 mm | 1,382 mm | 0 mm |
| Curb Weight | 2,064 kg | 1,599 kg | 1 kg |
| Fuel Capacity | 79 L | 61 L | 18 L |
| Headroom, Row 1 | 996 mm | 955 mm | 41 mm |
| Shoulder Room, Row 1 | 1,565 mm | 1,430 mm | 0 mm |
| Hip Room, Row 1 | 1,499 mm | 1,394 mm | 0 mm |
| Legroom, Row 1 | 1,046 mm | 1,067 mm | 0 mm |
| Headroom, Row 2 | 980 mm | 884 mm | 96 mm |
| Shoulder Room, Row 2 | 1,562 mm | 1,326 mm | 0 mm |
| Hip Room, Row 2 | 1,501 mm | 1,204 mm | 0 mm |
| Legroom, Row 2 | 983 mm | 777 mm | 206 mm |
| Headroom, Row 3 | 953 mm | 0 mm | 953 mm |
| Shoulder Room, Row 3 | 1,450 mm | 0 mm | 1 mm |
| Hip Room, Row 3 | 1,067 mm | 0 mm | 1 mm |
| Legroom, Row 3 | 739 mm | 0 mm | 739 mm |
| Total Legroom | 2,769 mm (over 3 rows) | 1,844 mm (over 2 rows) | 1 mm |
| Cargo Volume, Minimum | 425 L | 382 L | 43 L |
| Cargo Volume, Behind R2 | 1,215 L | 13.5 | -12.5 L |
| Cargo Volume, Maximum | 2,364 L | 13.5 | -11.5 L |
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2012 Acura MDX
| 2012 Acura MDX Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
| Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
| 2012 | 4dr SUV 300-horsepower 3.7L V6 6-speed shiftable automatic AWD |
The interior prioritizes appearance over actual utility; it's surprisingly cramped for such a large vehicle. For example, my Highlander is roughly the same size externally but seems downright cavernous on the inside in comparison. A rear passenger can fully stretch out in the Toyota. Not so in the Acura. see full Acura MDX review |
TrueDelta Reviews the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2016 Ford Mustang
| 2016 Ford Mustang Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
| Year | Comment | |
| This "why not" should not come as a surprise. Neither the Mustang nor the Audi has much rear legroom. Plus in the Mustang my head was pressed against the rear window, and I'm only 5-9. The Mustang coupe's rear seat is viable only for people up to 5-6 or so in height. The Audi has a little more rear headroom. As does the Mustang convertible. If you will be putting people into the rear seat of the Mustang, you should turn off the "easy entry" feature. When it's activated, this feature automatically motors the seat backward when the engine is shut off, reducing rear legroom to near zero. I was nearly trapped when I turned the engine off while sitting in the back seat to take photos. If you want a V8-powered coupe with a roomy rear seat, get a Dodge Challenger. Both the Mustang and the RS 5 do a better job of transporting luggage than rear seat passengers. Both trunks have about as much capacity as that of the average compact sedan. see full Ford Mustang review | ||
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2016 Ford Mustang
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2016 Ford Mustang.
See TrueDelta's information for all SUVs
See TrueDelta's information for all Acura models.
