2005 Chevrolet TrailBlazer vs. 1989 Mercury Cougar
To start off, 2005 Chevrolet TrailBlazer is newer by 16 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1989 Mercury Cougar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1989 Mercury Cougar would be higher. At 4,162 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Chevrolet TrailBlazer is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Chevrolet TrailBlazer (275 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 135 more horse power than 1989 Mercury Cougar. (140 HP @ 3800 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Chevrolet TrailBlazer should accelerate faster than 1989 Mercury Cougar.
Because 2005 Chevrolet TrailBlazer is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1989 Mercury Cougar. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Chevrolet TrailBlazer 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. Let's talk about torque, 2005 Chevrolet TrailBlazer (373 Nm) has 81 more torque (in Nm) than 1989 Mercury Cougar. (292 Nm). This means 2005 Chevrolet TrailBlazer will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1989 Mercury Cougar.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Chevrolet TrailBlazer | 1989 Mercury Cougar | |
Make | Chevrolet | Mercury |
Model | TrailBlazer | Cougar |
Year Released | 2005 | 1989 |
Body Type | SUV | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4162 cc | 3799 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 275 HP | 140 HP |
Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 3800 RPM |
Torque | 373 Nm | 292 Nm |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Number of Seats | 7 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5280 mm | 5050 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 1850 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1920 mm | 1340 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3280 mm | 2880 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 13.1 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 16.8 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 15.7 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 95 L | 72 L |