2009 Mercury Sable vs. 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer
To start off, 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2009 Mercury Sable. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2009 Mercury Sable would be higher. At 3,496 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Mercury Sable is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mercury Sable (263 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 115 more horse power than 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer. (148 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mercury Sable should accelerate faster than 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear wheel drive vehicles. 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 Sable (338 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 142 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer. (196 Nm @ 4200 RPM). This means 2009 Mercury Sable will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Mercury Sable | 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer | |
| Make | Mercury | Mitsubishi |
| Model | Sable | Lancer |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3496 cc | 2000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 263 HP | 148 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6250 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 338 Nm | 196 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 4200 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | CVT |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5140 mm | 4582 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 1763 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1570 mm | 1516 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2870 mm | 2634 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 8.4 L/100km | 7.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.1 L/100km | 9.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 78 L | 59 L |
