2009 Land Rover Range Rover vs. 1966 Mercury Comet
To start off, 2009 Land Rover Range Rover is newer by 43 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Mercury Comet. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Mercury Comet would be higher. At 4,394 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Land Rover Range Rover is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Land Rover Range Rover (301 HP @ 5750 RPM) has 183 more horse power than 1966 Mercury Comet. (118 HP @ 4400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Land Rover Range Rover should accelerate faster than 1966 Mercury Comet.
Because 2009 Land Rover Range Rover is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1966 Mercury Comet. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Land Rover Range Rover 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, 2009 Land Rover Range Rover (325 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 67 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Mercury Comet. (258 Nm @ 2400 RPM). This means 2009 Land Rover Range Rover will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Mercury Comet.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Land Rover Range Rover | 1966 Mercury Comet | |
Make | Land Rover | Mercury |
Model | Range Rover | Comet |
Year Released | 2009 | 1966 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4394 cc | 3279 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 301 HP | 118 HP |
Engine RPM | 5750 RPM | 4400 RPM |
Torque | 325 Nm | 258 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 2400 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.5:1 | 10.5:1 |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4510 mm | 5180 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1930 mm | 1390 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3230 mm | 2950 mm |