1966 Mercury Cougar vs. 2001 Toyota Tundra
To start off, 2001 Toyota Tundra is newer by 35 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Mercury Cougar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Mercury Cougar would be higher. At 4,728 cc (8 cylinders), 1966 Mercury Cougar is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2001 Toyota Tundra (187 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 58 more horse power than 1966 Mercury Cougar. (129 HP @ 4400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2001 Toyota Tundra should accelerate faster than 1966 Mercury Cougar. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2001 Toyota Tundra weights approximately 358 kg more than 1966 Mercury Cougar. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2001 Toyota Tundra is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1966 Mercury Cougar. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2001 Toyota Tundra 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.
Compare all specifications:
1966 Mercury Cougar | 2001 Toyota Tundra | |
Make | Mercury | Toyota |
Model | Cougar | Tundra |
Year Released | 1966 | 2001 |
Body Type | Coupe | Pickup |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4728 cc | 3398 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 129 HP | 187 HP |
Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 4800 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Vehicle Weight | 1362 kg | 1720 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4990 mm | 5530 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1920 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1320 mm | 1800 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2830 mm | 3270 mm |