2005 Mercury Montego vs. 2009 Audi R8
To start off, 2009 Audi R8 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Mercury Montego. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Mercury Montego would be higher. At 5,204 cc (10 cylinders), 2009 Audi R8 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Audi R8 (518 HP) has 315 more horse power than 2005 Mercury Montego. (203 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Audi R8 should accelerate faster than 2005 Mercury Montego. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Mercury Montego weights approximately 197 kg more than 2009 Audi R8.
Both vehicles are all wheel drive (AWD) - it offers better handling, traction, and control in all driving conditions compared with front wheel drive or rear 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, 2009 Audi R8 (530 Nm) has 249 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Mercury Montego. (281 Nm). This means 2009 Audi R8 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Mercury Montego.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Mercury Montego | 2009 Audi R8 | |
| Make | Mercury | Audi |
| Model | Montego | R8 |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Middle |
| Engine Size | 2983 cc | 5204 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 10 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 203 HP | 518 HP |
| Torque | 281 Nm | 530 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 12.5:1 |
| Drive Type | AWD | AWD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1777 kg | 1580 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5100 mm | 4440 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 1940 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1570 mm | 1260 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2870 mm | 2660 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.2 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 12.5 L/100km | 19.6 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.4 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 72 L | 75 L |
