2005 Ford Falcon vs. 1983 Mercury Lynx
To start off, 2005 Ford Falcon is newer by 22 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1983 Mercury Lynx. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1983 Mercury Lynx would be higher. At 3,984 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Ford Falcon is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Ford Falcon (200 HP @ 4900 RPM) has 130 more horse power than 1983 Mercury Lynx. (70 HP @ 4600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 1983 Mercury Lynx. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Ford Falcon weights approximately 627 kg more than 1983 Mercury Lynx. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2005 Ford Falcon is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2005 Ford Falcon. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1983 Mercury Lynx, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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 Ford Falcon (357 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 236 more torque (in Nm) than 1983 Mercury Lynx. (121 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2005 Ford Falcon will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1983 Mercury Lynx.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Ford Falcon | 1983 Mercury Lynx | |
Make | Ford | Mercury |
Model | Falcon | Lynx |
Year Released | 2005 | 1983 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3984 cc | 1598 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 200 HP | 70 HP |
Engine RPM | 4900 RPM | 4600 RPM |
Torque | 357 Nm | 121 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 92.4 mm | 80 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 99.3 mm | 79.5 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.6:1 | 8.8:1 |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Weight | 1581 kg | 954 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2930 mm | 2400 mm |