2009 Land Rover LR2 vs. 1966 Mercury Cougar
To start off, 2009 Land Rover LR2 is newer by 43 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 4,728 cc (8 cylinders), 1966 Mercury Cougar is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Land Rover LR2 (231 HP @ 6300 RPM) has 102 more horse power than 1966 Mercury Cougar. (129 HP @ 4400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Land Rover LR2 should accelerate faster than 1966 Mercury Cougar.
Because 2009 Land Rover LR2 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, 2009 Land Rover LR2 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:
| 2009 Land Rover LR2 | 1966 Mercury Cougar | |
| Make | Land Rover | Mercury |
| Model | LR2 | Cougar |
| Year Released | 2009 | 1966 |
| Body Type | SUV | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3192 cc | 4728 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 231 HP | 129 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6300 RPM | 4400 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4990 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1910 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1750 mm | 1320 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2670 mm | 2830 mm |
