2006 Mercury Mariner vs. 2012 Nissan GT-R
To start off, 2012 Nissan GT-R is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Mercury Mariner. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Mercury Mariner would be higher. At 3,800 cc (6 cylinders), 2012 Nissan GT-R is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Nissan GT-R (530 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 377 more horse power than 2006 Mercury Mariner. (153 HP @ 5800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Nissan GT-R should accelerate faster than 2006 Mercury Mariner. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Mercury Mariner weights approximately 188 kg more than 2012 Nissan GT-R.
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, 2012 Nissan GT-R (607 Nm @ 5200 RPM) has 401 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mercury Mariner. (206 Nm @ 4250 RPM). This means 2012 Nissan GT-R will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mercury Mariner.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Mercury Mariner | 2012 Nissan GT-R | |
| Make | Mercury | Nissan |
| Model | Mariner | GT-R |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2012 |
| Body Type | SUV | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2262 cc | 3800 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 153 HP | 530 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5800 RPM | 6400 RPM |
| Torque | 206 Nm | 607 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4250 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | 4WD | AWD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1925 kg | 1737 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4450 mm | 4671 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1895 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1780 mm | 1369 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2630 mm | 2779 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.1 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 10.7 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 62 L | 74 L |
