1966 Mercury Comet vs. 2003 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2003 Ford Ecosport is newer by 37 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Mercury Comet. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Mercury Comet would be higher. At 6,393 cc (8 cylinders), 1966 Mercury Comet is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1966 Mercury Comet (405 HP) has 311 more horse power than 2003 Ford Ecosport. (94 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1966 Mercury Comet should accelerate faster than 2003 Ford Ecosport.
Because 1966 Mercury Comet 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 Mercury Comet. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Ford Ecosport, 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 Mercury Comet | 2003 Ford Ecosport | |
Make | Mercury | Ford |
Model | Comet | Ecosport |
Year Released | 1966 | 2003 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6393 cc | 1000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 405 HP | 94 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 5180 mm | 4228 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1880 mm | 1980 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1390 mm | 1679 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2950 mm | 2490 mm |