2005 Mercury Mariner vs. 2012 BMW 535
To start off, 2012 BMW 535 is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Mercury Mariner. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Mercury Mariner would be higher. At 2,999 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Mercury Mariner is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 BMW 535 weights approximately 426 kg more than 2005 Mercury Mariner.
Because 2012 BMW 535 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 2012 BMW 535. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Mercury Mariner, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Mercury Mariner | 2012 BMW 535 | |
| Make | Mercury | BMW |
| Model | Mariner | 535 |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2012 |
| Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2999 cc | 2979 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 200 HP | 0 HP |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1499 kg | 1925 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 4899 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1860 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1730 mm | 1464 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2630 mm | 2968 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.4 L/100km | 6.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 11.8 L/100km | 5.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 10.7 L/100km | 6.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 62 L | 67 L |
