1968 Mercury Cougar vs. 1982 Nissan Pulsar
To start off, 1982 Nissan Pulsar is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Mercury Cougar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Mercury Cougar would be higher. At 4,942 cc (8 cylinders), 1968 Mercury Cougar is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1968 Mercury Cougar (137 HP) has 67 more horse power than 1982 Nissan Pulsar. (70 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1968 Mercury Cougar should accelerate faster than 1982 Nissan Pulsar. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1968 Mercury Cougar weights approximately 535 kg more than 1982 Nissan Pulsar. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1968 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 1968 Mercury Cougar. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1982 Nissan Pulsar, 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:
1968 Mercury Cougar | 1982 Nissan Pulsar | |
Make | Mercury | Nissan |
Model | Cougar | Pulsar |
Year Released | 1968 | 1982 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4942 cc | 1488 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 137 HP | 70 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Weight | 1400 kg | 865 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4990 mm | 3970 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1630 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1320 mm | 1400 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2830 mm | 2420 mm |