1968 Mercury Cougar vs. 2010 Nissan Pixo
To start off, 2010 Nissan Pixo is newer by 42 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 69 more horse power than 2010 Nissan Pixo. (68 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1968 Mercury Cougar should accelerate faster than 2010 Nissan Pixo.
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, 2010 Nissan Pixo, 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 | 2010 Nissan Pixo | |
| Make | Mercury | Nissan |
| Model | Cougar | Pixo |
| Year Released | 1968 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4942 cc | 996 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 137 HP | 68 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4990 mm | 3580 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1680 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1320 mm | 1400 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2830 mm | 2360 mm |
