2009 BMW 135 vs. 2000 Mercury Sable
To start off, 2009 BMW 135 is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Mercury Sable. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Mercury Sable would be higher. At 3,001 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Mercury Sable is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Mercury Sable weights approximately 159 kg more than 2009 BMW 135.
Because 2009 BMW 135 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 2009 BMW 135. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Mercury Sable, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2009 BMW 135 (400 Nm) has 152 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Mercury Sable. (248 Nm). This means 2009 BMW 135 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Mercury Sable.
Compare all specifications:
2009 BMW 135 | 2000 Mercury Sable | |
Make | BMW | Mercury |
Model | 135 | Sable |
Year Released | 2009 | 2000 |
Body Type | Convertible | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2979 cc | 3001 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 302 HP | 0 HP |
Torque | 400 Nm | 248 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 6 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1415 kg | 1574 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4370 mm | 5100 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1420 mm | 1860 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1760 mm | 1420 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2670 mm | 2760 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 53 L | 68 L |