2002 Chevrolet Astro vs. 1966 Mercury Cougar
To start off, 2002 Chevrolet Astro is newer by 36 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Mercury Cougar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Mercury Cougar would be higher. At 6,392 cc (8 cylinders), 1966 Mercury Cougar is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1966 Mercury Cougar (208 HP @ 4600 RPM) has 21 more horse power than 2002 Chevrolet Astro. (187 HP @ 4400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1966 Mercury Cougar should accelerate faster than 2002 Chevrolet Astro. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Chevrolet Astro weights approximately 420 kg more than 1966 Mercury Cougar.
Because 2002 Chevrolet Astro is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1966 Mercury Cougar. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2002 Chevrolet Astro 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Chevrolet Astro | 1966 Mercury Cougar | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Mercury |
| Model | Astro | Cougar |
| Year Released | 2002 | 1966 |
| Body Type | Minivan | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4294 cc | 6392 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 187 HP | 208 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 4600 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Number of Doors | 3 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2080 kg | 1660 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4830 mm | 4990 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1980 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1910 mm | 1320 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2830 mm | 2830 mm |
