1966 Mercury Comet vs. 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor
To start off, 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor is newer by 38 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 3,835 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor (225 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 107 more horse power than 1966 Mercury Comet. (118 HP @ 4400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor should accelerate faster than 1966 Mercury Comet.
Because 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1966 Mercury Comet. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor will offer significantly more control. 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, 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor (339 Nm) has 81 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Mercury Comet. (258 Nm). This means 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Mercury Comet.
Compare all specifications:
| 1966 Mercury Comet | 2004 Mitsubishi Endeavor | |
| Make | Mercury | Mitsubishi |
| Model | Comet | Endeavor |
| Year Released | 1966 | 2004 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3279 cc | 3835 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 118 HP | 225 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Torque | 258 Nm | 339 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.5:1 | 10.0:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Vehicle Length | 5000 mm | 4840 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1880 mm | 1880 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1790 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2950 mm | 2730 mm |
