2008 Cadillac CTS vs. 1966 Mercury Cougar
To start off, 2008 Cadillac CTS is newer by 42 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Mercury Cougar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Mercury Cougar would be higher. At 6,392 cc (8 cylinders), 1966 Mercury Cougar is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2008 Cadillac CTS (210 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 2 more horse power than 1966 Mercury Cougar. (208 HP @ 4600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2008 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 1966 Mercury Cougar. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1966 Mercury Cougar weights approximately 100 kg more than 2008 Cadillac CTS.
Because 2008 Cadillac CTS is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1966 Mercury Cougar. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2008 Cadillac CTS 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2008 Cadillac CTS | 1966 Mercury Cougar | |
| Make | Cadillac | Mercury |
| Model | CTS | Cougar |
| Year Released | 2008 | 1966 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2792 cc | 6392 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 210 HP | 208 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 4600 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1560 kg | 1660 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4990 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1320 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2890 mm | 2830 mm |
