1999 Ford Falcon vs. 1966 Mercury Comet
To start off, 1999 Ford Falcon is newer by 33 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Mercury Comet. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Mercury Comet would be higher. At 3,984 cc (6 cylinders), 1999 Ford Falcon is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1999 Ford Falcon (220 HP @ 4900 RPM) has 102 more horse power than 1966 Mercury Comet. (118 HP @ 4400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1999 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 1966 Mercury Comet.
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, 1999 Ford Falcon (366 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 108 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Mercury Comet. (258 Nm @ 2400 RPM). This means 1999 Ford Falcon will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Mercury Comet.
Compare all specifications:
1999 Ford Falcon | 1966 Mercury Comet | |
Make | Ford | Mercury |
Model | Falcon | Comet |
Year Released | 1999 | 1966 |
Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3984 cc | 3279 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 220 HP | 118 HP |
Engine RPM | 4900 RPM | 4400 RPM |
Torque | 366 Nm | 258 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 2400 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.6:1 | 10.5:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 5000 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1880 mm | 1880 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1400 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2950 mm |