2006 Mazda 3 vs. 1982 Mercury Cougar
To start off, 2006 Mazda 3 is newer by 24 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Mercury Cougar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Mercury Cougar would be higher. At 4,942 cc (8 cylinders), 1982 Mercury Cougar is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1982 Mercury Cougar weights approximately 360 kg more than 2006 Mazda 3.
Because 1982 Mercury Cougar 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 1982 Mercury Cougar. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Mazda 3, 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:
| 2006 Mazda 3 | 1982 Mercury Cougar | |
| Make | Mazda | Mercury |
| Model | 3 | Cougar |
| Year Released | 2006 | 1982 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1598 cc | 4942 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 105 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1120 kg | 1480 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4490 mm | 5140 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1810 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2650 mm |
