2004 Lincoln LS vs. 2009 Nissan 370Z
To start off, 2009 Nissan 370Z is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Lincoln LS. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Lincoln LS would be higher. At 3,933 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Lincoln LS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Nissan 370Z (327 HP) has 47 more horse power than 2004 Lincoln LS. (280 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Nissan 370Z should accelerate faster than 2004 Lincoln LS.
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. Let's talk about torque, 2004 Lincoln LS (388 Nm) has 118 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Nissan 370Z. (270 Nm). This means 2004 Lincoln LS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Nissan 370Z. 2004 Lincoln LS has automatic transmission and 2009 Nissan 370Z has manual transmission. 2009 Nissan 370Z will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2004 Lincoln LS will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Lincoln LS | 2009 Nissan 370Z | |
Make | Lincoln | Nissan |
Model | LS | 370Z |
Year Released | 2004 | 2009 |
Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3933 cc | 3697 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 280 HP | 327 HP |
Torque | 388 Nm | 270 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1870 mm | 1860 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.8 L/100km | 9.1 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |