2004 Land Rover Range Rover vs. 1996 Mercury Cougar
To start off, 2004 Land Rover Range Rover is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Mercury Cougar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Mercury Cougar would be higher. At 4,392 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Land Rover Range Rover is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Land Rover Range Rover weights approximately 822 kg more than 1996 Mercury Cougar.
Because 2004 Land Rover Range Rover is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1996 Mercury Cougar. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Land Rover Range Rover 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:
| 2004 Land Rover Range Rover | 1996 Mercury Cougar | |
| Make | Land Rover | Mercury |
| Model | Range Rover | Cougar |
| Year Released | 2004 | 1996 |
| Body Type | SUV | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4392 cc | 3798 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 282 HP | 0 HP |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2442 kg | 1620 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4960 mm | 5090 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1930 mm | 1860 mm |
