1981 Mercury Cougar vs. 2003 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2003 Ford Ecosport is newer by 22 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 3,797 cc (6 cylinders), 1981 Mercury Cougar is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1981 Mercury Cougar (114 HP) has 20 more horse power than 2003 Ford Ecosport. (94 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1981 Mercury Cougar should accelerate faster than 2003 Ford Ecosport.
Because 1981 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 1981 Mercury Cougar. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Ford Ecosport, 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:
| 1981 Mercury Cougar | 2003 Ford Ecosport | |
| Make | Mercury | Ford |
| Model | Cougar | Ecosport |
| Year Released | 1981 | 2003 |
| Body Type | Coupe | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3797 cc | 1000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 114 HP | 94 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4960 mm | 4228 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1810 mm | 1980 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1679 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2690 mm | 2490 mm |
