2001 Mercury Cougar vs. 1965 MG MGC
To start off, 2001 Mercury Cougar is newer by 36 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 MG MGC. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 MG MGC would be higher. At 2,912 cc (6 cylinders), 1965 MG MGC is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2001 Mercury Cougar (196 HP @ 6750 RPM) has 48 more horse power than 1965 MG MGC. (148 HP @ 5250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2001 Mercury Cougar should accelerate faster than 1965 MG MGC.
Because 1965 MG MGC 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 1965 MG MGC. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2001 Mercury Cougar, 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, 2001 Mercury Cougar (228 Nm @ 5500 RPM) has 54 more torque (in Nm) than 1965 MG MGC. (174 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 2001 Mercury Cougar will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1965 MG MGC.
Compare all specifications:
| 2001 Mercury Cougar | 1965 MG MGC | |
| Make | Mercury | MG |
| Model | Cougar | MGC |
| Year Released | 2001 | 1965 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Convertible |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2543 cc | 2912 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 196 HP | 148 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6750 RPM | 5250 RPM |
| Torque | 228 Nm | 174 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 5500 RPM | 3500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4710 mm | 4530 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1530 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2560 mm |
