2001 Ford Puma vs. 1967 Mercury Brougham
To start off, 2001 Ford Puma is newer by 34 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1967 Mercury Brougham. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1967 Mercury Brougham would be higher. At 6,990 cc (8 cylinders), 1967 Mercury Brougham is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1967 Mercury Brougham (340 HP @ 4600 RPM) has 241 more horse power than 2001 Ford Puma. (99 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1967 Mercury Brougham should accelerate faster than 2001 Ford Puma.
Because 1967 Mercury Brougham 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 Brougham. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2001 Ford Puma, 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, 1967 Mercury Brougham (627 Nm @ 2800 RPM) has 478 more torque (in Nm) than 2001 Ford Puma. (149 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1967 Mercury Brougham will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2001 Ford Puma.
Compare all specifications:
2001 Ford Puma | 1967 Mercury Brougham | |
Make | Ford | Mercury |
Model | Puma | Brougham |
Year Released | 2001 | 1967 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1560 cc | 6990 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 99 HP | 340 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4600 RPM |
Torque | 149 Nm | 627 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 2800 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Vehicle Length | 3990 mm | 5560 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1680 mm | 1990 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1430 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2450 mm | 3130 mm |