2000 Holden HRT vs. 1967 Mercury Park Lane
To start off, 2000 Holden HRT is newer by 33 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1967 Mercury Park Lane. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1967 Mercury Park Lane would be higher. At 6,722 cc (8 cylinders), 1967 Mercury Park Lane is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1967 Mercury Park Lane 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 1967 Mercury Park Lane. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Holden HRT, 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, 2000 Holden HRT (815 Nm) has 213 more torque (in Nm) than 1967 Mercury Park Lane. (602 Nm). This means 2000 Holden HRT will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1967 Mercury Park Lane.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Holden HRT | 1967 Mercury Park Lane | |
| Make | Holden | Mercury |
| Model | HRT | Park Lane |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1967 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5000 cc | 6722 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 325 HP |
| Torque | 815 Nm | 602 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
