2002 MCC Crossblade vs. 1967 Mercury Cougar
To start off, 2002 MCC Crossblade is newer by 35 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1967 Mercury Cougar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1967 Mercury Cougar would be higher. At 4,940 cc (8 cylinders), 1967 Mercury Cougar is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1967 Mercury Cougar (137 HP) has 67 more horse power than 2002 MCC Crossblade. (70 HP) In normal driving conditions, 1967 Mercury Cougar should accelerate faster than 2002 MCC Crossblade. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1967 Mercury Cougar weights approximately 660 kg more than 2002 MCC Crossblade. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 MCC Crossblade | 1967 Mercury Cougar | |
| Make | MCC | Mercury |
| Model | Crossblade | Cougar |
| Year Released | 2002 | 1967 |
| Engine Size | 599 cc | 4940 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 70 HP | 137 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 740 kg | 1400 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 2630 mm | 4990 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1630 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1520 mm | 1320 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 1810 mm | 2830 mm |
