1966 DAF Daffodil vs. 1999 Mercury Villager
To start off, 1999 Mercury Villager is newer by 33 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 DAF Daffodil. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 DAF Daffodil would be higher. At 3,276 cc (6 cylinders), 1999 Mercury Villager is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1999 Mercury Villager (169 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 143 more horse power than 1966 DAF Daffodil. (26 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1999 Mercury Villager should accelerate faster than 1966 DAF Daffodil. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1999 Mercury Villager weights approximately 1119 kg more than 1966 DAF Daffodil. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1966 DAF Daffodil is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1966 DAF Daffodil. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1999 Mercury Villager, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1966 DAF Daffodil | 1999 Mercury Villager | |
| Make | DAF | Mercury |
| Model | Daffodil | Villager |
| Year Released | 1966 | 1999 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 746 cc | 3276 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 2 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 26 HP | 169 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 4800 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Vehicle Weight | 666 kg | 1785 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3620 mm | 4950 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1450 mm | 1910 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1790 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2060 mm | 2860 mm |
