1962 Humber Hawk vs. 1966 Mercury Comet
To start off, 1966 Mercury Comet is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Humber Hawk. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Humber Hawk would be higher. At 3,279 cc (6 cylinders), 1966 Mercury Comet is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1966 Mercury Comet (118 HP @ 4400 RPM) has 45 more horse power than 1962 Humber Hawk. (73 HP @ 4400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1966 Mercury Comet should accelerate faster than 1962 Humber Hawk.
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 95 more torque (in Nm) than 1962 Humber Hawk. (163 Nm @ 2300 RPM). This means 1966 Mercury Comet will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1962 Humber Hawk.
Compare all specifications:
| 1962 Humber Hawk | 1966 Mercury Comet | |
| Make | Humber | Mercury |
| Model | Hawk | Comet |
| Year Released | 1962 | 1966 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2265 cc | 3279 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 73 HP | 118 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 4400 RPM |
| Torque | 163 Nm | 258 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2300 RPM | 2400 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 81 mm | 103.1 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 7.5:1 | 10.5:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 4700 mm | 5180 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1880 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1580 mm | 1390 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2800 mm | 2950 mm |
