Ford Mustang vs Kia Stinger: Specs Compared

Running cost over five years: at the EPA's 15,000-mile-a-year assumption the Ford Mustang burns about $2,350 of fuel annually against $3,050 for the Kia Stinger. That $700 yearly gap compounds to roughly $3,500 over five years and $5,600 over eight — often more than the price difference between two trims of the same vehicle, and the single largest running-cost line item separating these two.

City versus highway split: the Kia Stinger is the stronger commuter at 22 mpg city, while the Ford Mustang pulls ahead on the interstate at 33 mpg highway. If most of your driving is stop-and-go traffic the city figure is the one to weigh; for long-distance highway mileage the reverse is true, and the two vehicles effectively swap places depending on how you drive.

Powertrain choice: the Ford Mustang is recorded with 4 distinct engine configurations (5.2, 5.0, SIDI & PFI), the Kia Stinger with 2 (SIDI, SIDI & PFI). Across 133 recorded Ford Mustang configurations and 24 for the Kia Stinger, the wider the engine spread the more the real-world fuel efficiency depends on which version you actually buy, so check the specific model year and drivetrain rather than the headline number.

Drivetrain and class: the Ford Mustang is offered with Rear-Wheel Drive, the Kia Stinger with Rear-Wheel Drive, All-Wheel Drive. All-wheel drive typically costs one to two mpg combined against the same vehicle in front- or rear-wheel drive, which is worth remembering when the gap between these two is small. The EPA classes them as Subcompact Cars and Midsize Cars respectively — the class drives the interior volume, cargo space and passenger space each one is measured against.

Tailpipe emissions: at their cleanest configurations the Ford Mustang emits 341 g/mile of CO2 versus 355 g/mile for the Kia Stinger. Emissions track fuel consumption almost exactly, so the cleaner vehicle here is also the cheaper one to fuel.