1999 Mercury Cougar vs. 2010 Citroen C-Crosser
To start off, 2010 Citroen C-Crosser is newer by 11 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1999 Mercury Cougar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1999 Mercury Cougar would be higher. At 2,359 cc (4 cylinders), 2010 Citroen C-Crosser is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Citroen C-Crosser (168 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 45 more horse power than 1999 Mercury Cougar. (123 HP @ 5500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Citroen C-Crosser should accelerate faster than 1999 Mercury Cougar.
Because 2010 Citroen C-Crosser is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1999 Mercury Cougar. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Citroen C-Crosser will offer significantly more control. 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, 2010 Citroen C-Crosser (232 Nm @ 4100 RPM) has 56 more torque (in Nm) than 1999 Mercury Cougar. (176 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2010 Citroen C-Crosser will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1999 Mercury Cougar.
Compare all specifications:
1999 Mercury Cougar | 2010 Citroen C-Crosser | |
Make | Mercury | Citroen |
Model | Cougar | C-Crosser |
Year Released | 1999 | 2010 |
Body Type | Coupe | Crossover |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1983 cc | 2359 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 123 HP | 168 HP |
Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 176 Nm | 232 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4100 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.7:1 | 10.5:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |