1981 Mercury Cougar vs. 2002 Toyota Tundra
To start off, 2002 Toyota Tundra is newer by 21 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1981 Mercury Cougar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1981 Mercury Cougar would be higher. At 4,698 cc (8 cylinders), 2002 Toyota Tundra is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Toyota Tundra (245 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 131 more horse power than 1981 Mercury Cougar. (114 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2002 Toyota Tundra should accelerate faster than 1981 Mercury Cougar. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1981 Mercury Cougar weights approximately 433 kg more than 2002 Toyota Tundra.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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, 2002 Toyota Tundra (427 Nm) has 190 more torque (in Nm) than 1981 Mercury Cougar. (237 Nm). This means 2002 Toyota Tundra will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1981 Mercury Cougar.
Compare all specifications:
| 1981 Mercury Cougar | 2002 Toyota Tundra | |
| Make | Mercury | Toyota |
| Model | Cougar | Tundra |
| Year Released | 1981 | 2002 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3797 cc | 4698 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 114 HP | 245 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Torque | 237 Nm | 427 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 1356 kg | 923 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4960 mm | 5530 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1810 mm | 1920 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1800 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2690 mm | 3270 mm |
