1953 Austin-Healey Tickford vs. 2002 Ford Ranger
To start off, 2002 Ford Ranger is newer by 49 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford would be higher. At 2,443 cc (4 cylinders), 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Ford Ranger (128 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 23 more horse power than 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford. (105 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2002 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Ford Ranger weights approximately 190 kg more than 1953 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, 2002 Ford Ranger (207 Nm) has 22 more torque (in Nm) than 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford. (185 Nm). This means 2002 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford.
Compare all specifications:
| 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford | 2002 Ford Ranger | |
| Make | Austin-Healey | Ford |
| Model | Tickford | Ranger |
| Year Released | 1953 | 2002 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2443 cc | 2300 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 105 HP | 128 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 185 Nm | 207 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 1720 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4770 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1770 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1660 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 3010 mm |
