2000 Ford Cougar vs. 2006 Rover 75
To start off, 2006 Rover 75 is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Ford Cougar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Ford Cougar would be higher. At 4,601 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Rover 75 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Rover 75 (256 HP) has 127 more horse power than 2000 Ford Cougar. (129 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Rover 75 should accelerate faster than 2000 Ford Cougar.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear 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, 2006 Rover 75 (245 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 69 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Ford Cougar. (176 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2006 Rover 75 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Ford Cougar.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Ford Cougar | 2006 Rover 75 | |
| Make | Ford | Rover |
| Model | Cougar | 75 |
| Year Released | 2000 | 2006 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1988 cc | 4601 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 129 HP | 256 HP |
| Torque | 176 Nm | 245 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 84.9 mm | 90.2 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 87.9 mm | 90 mm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4710 mm | 4750 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2750 mm |
