2007 Cadillac STS vs. 1966 Mercury Comet
To start off, 2007 Cadillac STS is newer by 41 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Mercury Comet. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Mercury Comet would be higher. At 4,565 cc (8 cylinders), 2007 Cadillac STS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2007 Cadillac STS (320 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 202 more horse power than 1966 Mercury Comet. (118 HP @ 4400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2007 Cadillac STS should accelerate faster than 1966 Mercury Comet.
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, 2007 Cadillac STS (427 Nm @ 4400 RPM) has 169 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Mercury Comet. (258 Nm @ 2400 RPM). This means 2007 Cadillac STS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Mercury Comet.
Compare all specifications:
2007 Cadillac STS | 1966 Mercury Comet | |
Make | Cadillac | Mercury |
Model | STS | Comet |
Year Released | 2007 | 1966 |
Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4565 cc | 3279 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 320 HP | 118 HP |
Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 4400 RPM |
Torque | 427 Nm | 258 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4400 RPM | 2400 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.5:1 | 10.5:1 |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Vehicle Length | 4990 mm | 5000 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1880 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1400 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2960 mm | 2950 mm |