2009 Dodge Challenger vs. 2005 Mercury Mountaineer
To start off, 2009 Dodge Challenger is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Mercury Mountaineer. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Mercury Mountaineer would be higher. At 4,015 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Mercury Mountaineer is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Dodge Challenger (250 HP) has 40 more horse power than 2005 Mercury Mountaineer. (210 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Dodge Challenger should accelerate faster than 2005 Mercury Mountaineer.
Because 2005 Mercury Mountaineer is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Dodge Challenger. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Mercury Mountaineer 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, 2005 Mercury Mountaineer (344 Nm) has 5 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Dodge Challenger. (339 Nm). This means 2005 Mercury Mountaineer will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Dodge Challenger.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Dodge Challenger | 2005 Mercury Mountaineer | |
| Make | Dodge | Mercury |
| Model | Challenger | Mountaineer |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2005 |
| Body Type | Coupe | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3518 cc | 4015 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 250 HP | 210 HP |
| Torque | 339 Nm | 344 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.3:1 | 9.7:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5030 mm | 4860 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1930 mm | 1840 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1850 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2950 mm | 2900 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.4 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.1 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 85 L |
