2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee vs. 1968 Mercury Cougar
To start off, 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee is newer by 37 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Mercury Cougar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Mercury Cougar would be higher. At 5,769 cc (8 cylinders), 1968 Mercury Cougar is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee (230 HP @ 3800 RPM) has 36 more horse power than 1968 Mercury Cougar. (194 HP @ 5400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee should accelerate faster than 1968 Mercury Cougar.
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, 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee (394 Nm) has 97 more torque (in Nm) than 1968 Mercury Cougar. (297 Nm). This means 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1968 Mercury Cougar.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee | 1968 Mercury Cougar | |
| Make | Jeep | Mercury |
| Model | Grand Cherokee | Cougar |
| Year Released | 2005 | 1968 |
| Body Type | SUV | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4703 cc | 5769 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 230 HP | 194 HP |
| Engine RPM | 3800 RPM | 5400 RPM |
| Torque | 394 Nm | 297 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4750 mm | 4990 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1870 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1730 mm | 1320 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2790 mm | 2830 mm |
