1967 Mercury Brougham vs. 2002 Acura CL
To start off, 2002 Acura CL is newer by 35 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1967 Mercury Brougham. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1967 Mercury Brougham would be higher. At 6,990 cc (8 cylinders), 1967 Mercury Brougham is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1967 Mercury Brougham (340 HP @ 4600 RPM) has 80 more horse power than 2002 Acura CL. (260 HP @ 6900 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1967 Mercury Brougham should accelerate faster than 2002 Acura CL.
Because 1967 Mercury Brougham 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 1967 Mercury Brougham. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2002 Acura CL, 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, 1967 Mercury Brougham (627 Nm @ 2800 RPM) has 312 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Acura CL. (315 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 1967 Mercury Brougham will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Acura CL.
Compare all specifications:
1967 Mercury Brougham | 2002 Acura CL | |
Make | Mercury | Acura |
Model | Brougham | CL |
Year Released | 1967 | 2002 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6990 cc | 3210 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 340 HP | 260 HP |
Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 6900 RPM |
Torque | 627 Nm | 315 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2800 RPM | 3500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Length | 5560 mm | 4880 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1990 mm | 1800 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1420 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3130 mm | 2580 mm |