1999 Mercury Sable vs. 1952 Riley RM A
To start off, 1999 Mercury Sable is newer by 47 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Riley RM A. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Riley RM A would be higher. At 2,982 cc (6 cylinders), 1999 Mercury Sable is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1999 Mercury Sable weights approximately 330 kg more than 1952 Riley RM A.
Because 1952 Riley RM A 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 1952 Riley RM A. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1999 Mercury Sable, 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. 1999 Mercury Sable has automatic transmission and 1952 Riley RM A has manual transmission. 1952 Riley RM A will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1999 Mercury Sable will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1999 Mercury Sable | 1952 Riley RM A | |
| Make | Mercury | Riley |
| Model | Sable | RM A |
| Year Released | 1999 | 1952 |
| Engine Size | 2982 cc | 1496 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 197 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1565 kg | 1235 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5030 mm | 4560 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1620 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1550 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2870 mm |
