2000 Citroen C1 vs. 1966 Mercury Comet
To start off, 2000 Citroen C1 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 6,393 cc (8 cylinders), 1966 Mercury Comet is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1966 Mercury Comet (405 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 338 more horse power than 2000 Citroen C1. (67 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1966 Mercury Comet should accelerate faster than 2000 Citroen C1.
Because 1966 Mercury Comet 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 1966 Mercury Comet. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Citroen C1, 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. Let's talk about torque, 1966 Mercury Comet (645 Nm @ 3400 RPM) has 552 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Citroen C1. (93 Nm @ 3600 RPM). This means 1966 Mercury Comet will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Citroen C1.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Citroen C1 | 1966 Mercury Comet | |
Make | Citroen | Mercury |
Model | C1 | Comet |
Year Released | 2000 | 1966 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 998 cc | 6393 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 67 HP | 405 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5600 RPM |
Torque | 93 Nm | 645 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3600 RPM | 3400 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 4 seats |
Vehicle Length | 3440 mm | 5180 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1880 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1390 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2350 mm | 2950 mm |