1966 Mercury Cougar vs. 2009 Mitsubishi Outlander
To start off, 2009 Mitsubishi Outlander is newer by 43 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, 2009 Mitsubishi Outlander (166 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 37 more horse power than 1966 Mercury Cougar. (129 HP @ 4400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mitsubishi Outlander should accelerate faster than 1966 Mercury Cougar.
Because 1966 Mercury Cougar 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 Cougar. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Mitsubishi Outlander, 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 Cougar | 2009 Mitsubishi Outlander | |
Make | Mercury | Mitsubishi |
Model | Cougar | Outlander |
Year Released | 1966 | 2009 |
Body Type | Coupe | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4728 cc | 2397 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 129 HP | 166 HP |
Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4990 mm | 4860 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1690 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1320 mm | 1810 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2830 mm | 2760 mm |