2007 Lincoln MKX vs. 2011 Suzuki Equator
To start off, 2011 Suzuki Equator is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2007 Lincoln MKX. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2007 Lincoln MKX would be higher. At 3,954 cc (6 cylinders), 2011 Suzuki Equator is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2007 Lincoln MKX (265 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 4 more horse power than 2011 Suzuki Equator. (261 HP @ 5600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2007 Lincoln MKX should accelerate faster than 2011 Suzuki Equator.
Because 2007 Lincoln MKX is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2011 Suzuki Equator. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2007 Lincoln MKX will offer significantly more control. 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, 2011 Suzuki Equator (381 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 42 more torque (in Nm) than 2007 Lincoln MKX. (339 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2011 Suzuki Equator will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2007 Lincoln MKX.
Compare all specifications:
| 2007 Lincoln MKX | 2011 Suzuki Equator | |
| Make | Lincoln | Suzuki |
| Model | MKX | Equator |
| Year Released | 2007 | 2011 |
| Body Type | SUV | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3496 cc | 3954 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 265 HP | 261 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6250 RPM | 5600 RPM |
| Torque | 339 Nm | 381 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 3 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4740 mm | 5250 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1930 mm | 1860 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1720 mm | 1790 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2830 mm | 3200 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 10 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.9 L/100km | 7.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 76 L | 80 L |
