2000 Mercury Sable vs. 1996 Mitsubishi Challenger
To start off, 2000 Mercury Sable is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Mitsubishi Challenger. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Mitsubishi Challenger would be higher. At 3,001 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Mercury Sable is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Mitsubishi Challenger weights approximately 236 kg more than 2000 Mercury Sable.
Because 1996 Mitsubishi Challenger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2000 Mercury Sable. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Mitsubishi Challenger will offer significantly more control. 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, 1996 Mitsubishi Challenger (320 Nm) has 72 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Mercury Sable. (248 Nm). This means 1996 Mitsubishi Challenger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Mercury Sable.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Mercury Sable | 1996 Mitsubishi Challenger | |
| Make | Mercury | Mitsubishi |
| Model | Sable | Challenger |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1996 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3001 cc | 2835 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 138 HP |
| Torque | 248 Nm | 320 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 6 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1574 kg | 1810 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5100 mm | 4540 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1740 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2730 mm |
