1952 Austin-Healey Tickford vs. 2006 Ford Ranger
To start off, 2006 Ford Ranger is newer by 54 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford would be higher. At 2,499 cc (4 cylinders), 2006 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Ford Ranger (108 HP @ 3500 RPM) has 3 more horse power than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. (105 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Ford Ranger weights approximately 185 kg more than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2006 Ford Ranger (257 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 73 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. (184 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2006 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford.
Compare all specifications:
| 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford | 2006 Ford Ranger | |
| Make | Austin-Healey | Ford |
| Model | Tickford | Ranger |
| Year Released | 1952 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2441 cc | 2499 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 3 valves |
| Horse Power | 105 HP | 108 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 3500 RPM |
| Torque | 184 Nm | 257 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 2000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 1715 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4670 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1350 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 3010 mm |
