1952 Buick 40 vs. 2005 Ford Ranger
To start off, 2005 Ford Ranger is newer by 53 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Buick 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Buick 40 would be higher. At 4,066 cc (8 cylinders), 1952 Buick 40 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1952 Buick 40 (118 HP @ 3600 RPM) has 14 more horse power than 2005 Ford Ranger. (104 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1952 Buick 40 should accelerate faster than 2005 Ford Ranger. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1952 Buick 40 weights approximately 312 kg more than 2005 Ford Ranger. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front 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, 1952 Buick 40 (292 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 120 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Ford Ranger. (172 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 1952 Buick 40 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Ford Ranger.
Compare all specifications:
1952 Buick 40 | 2005 Ford Ranger | |
Make | Buick | Ford |
Model | 40 | Ranger |
Year Released | 1952 | 2005 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4066 cc | 2184 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 3 valves |
Horse Power | 118 HP | 104 HP |
Engine RPM | 3600 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Torque | 292 Nm | 172 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 3500 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1635 kg | 1323 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 3090 mm | 2990 mm |