1966 Mercury Comet vs. 2009 Seat Exeo
To start off, 2009 Seat Exeo is newer by 43 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 4,738 cc (8 cylinders), 1966 Mercury Comet is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1966 Mercury Comet (198 HP @ 4400 RPM) has 57 more horse power than 2009 Seat Exeo. (141 HP @ 4200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1966 Mercury Comet should accelerate faster than 2009 Seat Exeo.
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, 2009 Seat Exeo, 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. Let's talk about torque, 1966 Mercury Comet (382 Nm @ 2400 RPM) has 62 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Seat Exeo. (320 Nm @ 1750 RPM). This means 1966 Mercury Comet will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Seat Exeo.
Compare all specifications:
1966 Mercury Comet | 2009 Seat Exeo | |
Make | Mercury | Seat |
Model | Comet | Exeo |
Year Released | 1966 | 2009 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4738 cc | 1968 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 198 HP | 141 HP |
Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 4200 RPM |
Torque | 382 Nm | 320 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2400 RPM | 1750 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 5000 mm | 4661 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1880 mm | 1772 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1430 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2950 mm | 2642 mm |