2009 Mazda 6 vs. 1982 Mercury Cougar
To start off, 2009 Mazda 6 is newer by 27 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Mercury Cougar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Mercury Cougar would be higher. At 2,487 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda 6 (168 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 77 more horse power than 1982 Mercury Cougar. (91 HP @ 4600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda 6 should accelerate faster than 1982 Mercury Cougar.
Because 1982 Mercury Cougar 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 1982 Mercury Cougar. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Mazda 6, 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 Mazda 6 (167 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 3 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Mercury Cougar. (164 Nm @ 2600 RPM). This means 2009 Mazda 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Mercury Cougar.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Mazda 6 | 1982 Mercury Cougar | |
Make | Mazda | Mercury |
Model | 6 | Cougar |
Year Released | 2009 | 1982 |
Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2487 cc | 2301 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 168 HP | 91 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4600 RPM |
Torque | 167 Nm | 164 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 2600 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1810 mm |