This study compares three routing protocols—Destination Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV), Ad-hoc On demand Distance Vector (AODV), and Dynamic Source Routing (DSR)—for wireless mobile ad-hoc networks. Extensive simulations are conducted on a scenario where nodes move randomly, and results are presented using a novel mobility metric that reflects the relative speeds of nodes. Additionally, three realistic scenarios—Conference, Event Coverage, and Disaster Area—are introduced to test the protocols in more specialized contexts. The reactive protocols (AODV and DSR) generally outperform DSDV, with DSR performing better at moderate traffic loads and AODV at higher traffic loads. The study highlights the importance of reactive routing protocols in dynamic ad-hoc networks and provides recommendations for selecting appropriate protocols based on network characteristics.This study compares three routing protocols—Destination Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV), Ad-hoc On demand Distance Vector (AODV), and Dynamic Source Routing (DSR)—for wireless mobile ad-hoc networks. Extensive simulations are conducted on a scenario where nodes move randomly, and results are presented using a novel mobility metric that reflects the relative speeds of nodes. Additionally, three realistic scenarios—Conference, Event Coverage, and Disaster Area—are introduced to test the protocols in more specialized contexts. The reactive protocols (AODV and DSR) generally outperform DSDV, with DSR performing better at moderate traffic loads and AODV at higher traffic loads. The study highlights the importance of reactive routing protocols in dynamic ad-hoc networks and provides recommendations for selecting appropriate protocols based on network characteristics.