2000 Caterham 21 vs. 1966 Mercury Comet
To start off, 2000 Caterham 21 is newer by 34 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 3,279 cc (6 cylinders), 1966 Mercury Comet is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Caterham 21 (230 HP @ 8600 RPM) has 112 more horse power than 1966 Mercury Comet. (118 HP @ 4400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Caterham 21 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, 1966 Mercury Comet (258 Nm @ 2400 RPM) has 48 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Caterham 21. (210 Nm @ 7200 RPM). This means 1966 Mercury Comet will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Caterham 21.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Caterham 21 | 1966 Mercury Comet | |
| Make | Caterham | Mercury |
| Model | 21 | Comet |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1966 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1794 cc | 3279 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 230 HP | 118 HP |
| Engine RPM | 8600 RPM | 4400 RPM |
| Torque | 210 Nm | 258 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 7200 RPM | 2400 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 11.5:1 | 10.5:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Length | 3860 mm | 5000 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1590 mm | 1880 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2230 mm | 2950 mm |
