Toyota Alphard 3.5 L V6 AT (2015) vs Ford Mustang 2.3L EcoBoost Premium SelectShift AT Fastback (2024)
A full spec-by-spec comparison of Toyota Alphard 3.5 L V6 AT (2015) vs Ford Mustang 2.3L EcoBoost Premium SelectShift AT Fastback (2024) — engine, performance, dimensions, features and price, with the differences highlighted to help you decide.
| Specification | Toyota Alphard 3.5 L V6 AT (2015) Toyota ₱3,379,000 | Ford Mustang 2.3L EcoBoost Premium SelectShift AT Fastback (2024) Ford ₱3,506,000 |
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Model Year | 2015 | 2024 |
| Warranty | 100,000km/3-years | 3 years or 100,000 kms |
| Availability | Discontinued | Current |
| Engine & Drivetrain | ||
| Engine Type | V6 | Inline-4 |
| Displacement | 3456cc | 2298cc |
| Valvetrain | DOHC 24-valve | DOHC 16-Valve |
| Aspiration | Naturally Aspirated, Dual VVT-I | Naturally Aspirated |
| Fuel Type | Gas | Gasoline |
| Max Power | 275 PS @ 6200 rpm | 315 PS |
| Max Torque | 340 Nm @ 4700 rpm | 475 Nm |
| Transmission | 4-Speed A/T | Automatic 10-Speed |
| Drivetrain | FWD | RWD |
| Body & Dimensions | ||
| Body Type | Van | Sports Coupe |
| Segment | M | Coupe |
| Construction | Unibody | Unibody |
| Doors | 5 | 2 |
| Seating Capacity | 2+2+3 | 2+2 |
| Length (mm) | 4850 | 4811 |
| Width (mm) | 1830 | 2097 |
| Height (mm) | 1905 | 1407 |
| Wheelbase (mm) | 2950 | 2719 |
| Exterior Colors | — | Glacier Grey, Star White, Shadow Black, Velocity Blue, Grabber Yellow |
| Curb Weight (kg) | — | 1623 |
| Fuel Tank (L) | — | 60 |
| Chassis, Wheels & Brakes | ||
| Front Suspension | MacPherson | MacPherson Strut w/Coil Spring |
| Rear Suspension | Torsion Beam | Multi-link with coil spring |
| Front Wheels | 16x7.0 | 19 |
| Rear Wheels | 16x7.0 | 19 |
| Front Tires | 215/45 R16 | 255/40ZR19 |
| Rear Tires | 215/45 R16 | 255/40ZR19 |
| Front Brakes | Disc | Disc |
| Rear Brakes | Disc | Disc |
| Steering Column | tilt | Tilt & Telescope |
| Tire Pressure Monitoring | No | Yes |
| Differential Lock | No | No |
| Steering Type | — | EPS |
| Safety | ||
| Anti-lock Braking (ABS) | Yes | Yes |
| Electronic Brakeforce Distribution | Yes | Yes |
| Brake Assist | Yes | Yes |
| Parking Sensors | Yes | Yes |
| Stability Control | Yes | Yes |
| Traction Control | Yes | No |
| Vehicle Dynamic Control | No | — |
| Forward Collision Mitigation | No | No |
| Blind Spot Warning | No | No |
| Hill Start Assist | Yes | No |
| Hill Descent Control | No | No |
| Auto Stop/Start | No | No |
| Driver Airbag | Yes | Yes |
| Knee Airbag | No | Yes |
| Passenger Airbag | Yes | Yes |
| Front Curtain Airbags | Yes | Yes |
| Rear Curtain Airbags | Yes | Yes |
| Rear Side Airbags | Yes | Yes |
| Engine Immobilizer | Yes | Yes |
| Security Alarm | Yes | Yes |
| Door Locking | Central Locking | Central Locking |
| Comfort & Convenience | ||
| Air Conditioning | Automatic Climate Control | Automatic Climate Control Dual Zone |
| Rear A/C Vents | Yes | No |
| Seat Material | Leather | Leather |
| Parking Brake | EPB | EPB |
| Key Type | Comfort Access Key | Keyless Entry |
| Push-Button Start | Yes | Yes |
| Cruise Control | Yes | Yes |
| Multi-Info Display | Yes | Yes |
| Paddle Shifters | No | Yes |
| Reverse Camera | No | Yes |
| Auto Headlights | Yes | No |
| Power Windows | Yes | Yes |
| Power Seats | Yes | Yes |
| Remote Trunk Release | No | No |
| Eco Mode | No | No |
| Antenna | yes | no |
| Infotainment & Audio | ||
| Speakers | 8 | 10 |
| Touchscreen | Yes | Yes |
| Navigation | Yes | No |
| Bluetooth | Yes | Yes |
| Apple CarPlay | No | Yes |
| Android Auto | No | Yes |
| USB | Yes | No |
| AUX Input | Yes | No |
| AM/FM Radio | Yes | Yes |
| CD Player | Yes | No |
| DVD Player | Yes | No |
| MP3 Playback | Yes | No |
| iPod Support | No | No |
| SD Card Slot | No | No |
| Lighting | ||
| Headlights | HID | LED |
| Fog Lights | Yes | No |
| Daytime Running Lights | No | Yes |
Toyota Alphard 3.5 L V6 AT (2015) vs Ford Mustang 2.3L EcoBoost Premium SelectShift AT Fastback (2024): which should you buy?
For a Filipino buyer, the choice between the Toyota Alphard 3.5 L V6 AT (2015) and the Ford Mustang 2.3L EcoBoost Premium SelectShift AT Fastback (2024) depends entirely on your priorities. The Alphard, at ₱3,379,000, is a discontinued luxury van with a spacious 2+2+3 seating layout, making it ideal for family or executive transport. Its 275 PS V6 engine and 4-speed automatic are adequate for city cruising, but its age and 4-speed transmission feel dated. The Mustang, at ₱3,506,000, is a current-model sports coupe with a more powerful 315 PS EcoBoost engine (though data says naturally aspirated, it's actually turbo but we stick to data) and a modern 10-speed automatic. It offers thrilling RWD performance but only seats four with two doors, compromising practicality. If you need passenger space, luxury, and a van body, get the Alphard. If you want head-turning style, superior power (315 PS vs 275 PS), and driving excitement, the Mustang wins. The Alphard’s longer wheelbase (implied) provides comfort, while the Mustang is for weekend thrills. Neither excels in daily commute fuel efficiency, but the Mustang’s newer tech and warranty appeal to enthusiasts. Ultimately, the Mustang is the better choice for buyers valuing performance and modernity, while the Alphard serves those needing maximum people-moving ability.
Frequently asked questions
Which is cheaper?
The Toyota Alphard (2015) is cheaper at ₱3,379,000 compared to the Ford Mustang (2024) at ₱3,506,000.
Which is more powerful?
The Ford Mustang produces 315 PS and 475 Nm, while the Toyota Alphard has 275 PS and 340 Nm, making the Mustang significantly more powerful.
Which is better for daily commuting?
The Alphard is better for daily commuting due to its van body, 5 doors, and 7-seat capacity, offering more comfort and space for passengers and cargo, while the Mustang's 2-door coupe is less practical for carrying multiple people.
Which is better for a family?
The Alphard is superior for a family with its 2+2+3 seating, 5 doors, and minivan practicality, whereas the Mustang only seats 4 in a cramped 2+2 configuration with limited cargo space.