1956 AC Aceca-Bristol vs. 1966 Mercury Comet
To start off, 1966 Mercury Comet is newer by 10 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1956 AC Aceca-Bristol. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1956 AC Aceca-Bristol would be higher. At 3,279 cc (6 cylinders), 1966 Mercury Comet is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1956 AC Aceca-Bristol (125 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 7 more horse power than 1966 Mercury Comet. (118 HP @ 4400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1956 AC Aceca-Bristol should accelerate faster than 1966 Mercury Comet.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 1966 Mercury Comet (258 Nm @ 2400 RPM) has 91 more torque (in Nm) than 1956 AC Aceca-Bristol. (167 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 1966 Mercury Comet will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1956 AC Aceca-Bristol.
Compare all specifications:
| 1956 AC Aceca-Bristol | 1966 Mercury Comet | |
| Make | AC | Mercury |
| Model | Aceca-Bristol | Comet |
| Year Released | 1956 | 1966 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1971 cc | 3279 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 125 HP | 118 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4400 RPM |
| Torque | 167 Nm | 258 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 2400 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.0:1 | 10.5:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Length | 4070 mm | 5000 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1560 mm | 1880 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1400 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2290 mm | 2950 mm |
