1982 Mercury Cougar vs. 2010 Ford C-Max
To start off, 2010 Ford C-Max is newer by 28 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Mercury Cougar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Mercury Cougar would be higher. At 4,942 cc (8 cylinders), 1982 Mercury Cougar is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1982 Mercury Cougar weights approximately 105 kg more than 2010 Ford C-Max.
Because 1982 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 1982 Mercury Cougar. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Ford C-Max, 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:
| 1982 Mercury Cougar | 2010 Ford C-Max | |
| Make | Mercury | Ford |
| Model | Cougar | C-Max |
| Year Released | 1982 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Minivan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4942 cc | 1997 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 113 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1480 kg | 1375 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5140 mm | 4380 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1810 mm | 1828 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2648 mm |
