1996 Mercury Cougar vs. 2010 Fiat Bravo
To start off, 2010 Fiat Bravo is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Mercury Cougar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Mercury Cougar would be higher. At 3,798 cc (8 cylinders), 1996 Mercury Cougar is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Mercury Cougar weights approximately 185 kg more than 2010 Fiat Bravo.
Because 1996 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 1996 Mercury Cougar. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Fiat Bravo, 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:
| 1996 Mercury Cougar | 2010 Fiat Bravo | |
| Make | Mercury | Fiat |
| Model | Cougar | Bravo |
| Year Released | 1996 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3798 cc | 1598 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 104 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1620 kg | 1435 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5090 mm | 4340 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1800 mm |
