2009 Mercury Milan vs. 2012 Tata Nano
To start off, 2012 Tata Nano is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2009 Mercury Milan. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2009 Mercury Milan would be higher. At 2,261 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Mercury Milan is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mercury Milan (160 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 125 more horse power than 2012 Tata Nano. (35 HP @ 5250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mercury Milan should accelerate faster than 2012 Tata Nano. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Mercury Milan weights approximately 1325 kg more than 2012 Tata Nano. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2012 Tata Nano 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 2012 Tata Nano. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Mercury Milan, 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 Mercury Milan (212 Nm @ 4250 RPM) has 164 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Tata Nano. (48 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2009 Mercury Milan will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Tata Nano. 2009 Mercury Milan has automatic transmission and 2012 Tata Nano has manual transmission. 2012 Tata Nano will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Mercury Milan will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Mercury Milan | 2012 Tata Nano | |
| Make | Mercury | Tata |
| Model | Milan | Nano |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Rear |
| Engine Size | 2261 cc | 624 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 2 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 160 HP | 35 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6250 RPM | 5250 RPM |
| Torque | 212 Nm | 48 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4250 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 87.4 mm | 73.5 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 94 mm | 73.5 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 12.3:1 | 9.5:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1925 kg | 600 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 3099 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1495 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1652 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2730 mm | 2230 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 10.2 L/100km | 4.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 66 L | 37 L |
