2000 Cadillac XLR vs. 1967 Mercury Comet
To start off, 2000 Cadillac XLR is newer by 33 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1967 Mercury Comet. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1967 Mercury Comet would be higher. At 4,565 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Cadillac XLR is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Cadillac XLR (301 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 183 more horse power than 1967 Mercury Comet. (118 HP @ 4400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Cadillac XLR should accelerate faster than 1967 Mercury Comet. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1967 Mercury Comet weights approximately 6 kg more than 2000 Cadillac XLR.
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, 2000 Cadillac XLR (428 Nm @ 4400 RPM) has 170 more torque (in Nm) than 1967 Mercury Comet. (258 Nm @ 2400 RPM). This means 2000 Cadillac XLR will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1967 Mercury Comet.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Cadillac XLR | 1967 Mercury Comet | |
Make | Cadillac | Mercury |
Model | XLR | Comet |
Year Released | 2000 | 1967 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4565 cc | 3279 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 301 HP | 118 HP |
Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 4400 RPM |
Torque | 428 Nm | 258 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4400 RPM | 2400 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1654 kg | 1660 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4520 mm | 5180 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1880 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1290 mm | 1390 mm |