2000 Mercury Sable vs. 2010 Ford Transit Connect
To start off, 2010 Ford Transit Connect is newer by 10 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Mercury Sable. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Mercury Sable would be higher. At 3,001 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Mercury Sable is equipped with a bigger engine.
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, 2000 Mercury Sable (248 Nm) has 75 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Ford Transit Connect. (173 Nm). This means 2000 Mercury Sable will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Ford Transit Connect.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Mercury Sable | 2010 Ford Transit Connect | |
| Make | Mercury | Ford |
| Model | Sable | Transit Connect |
| Year Released | 2000 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Panel Van |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3001 cc | 2000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 136 HP |
| Torque | 248 Nm | 173 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1574 kg | 1574 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5100 mm | 4587 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1796 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 2014 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2911 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 58 L |
