1962 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk II vs. 1983 Ford Ranger
To start off, 1983 Ford Ranger is newer by 21 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk II. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk II would be higher. At 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 1983 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1983 Ford Ranger (145 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 16 more horse power than 1962 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk II. (129 HP @ 4600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1983 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 1962 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk II.
Because 1983 Ford Ranger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1962 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk II. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1983 Ford Ranger will offer significantly more control. 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. 1983 Ford Ranger has automatic transmission and 1962 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk II has manual transmission. 1962 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk II will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1983 Ford Ranger will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1962 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk II | 1983 Ford Ranger | |
| Make | Austin-Healey | Ford |
| Model | 3000 Mk II | Ranger |
| Year Released | 1962 | 1983 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2912 cc | 3000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 129 HP | 145 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Vehicle Length | 4010 mm | 4690 mm |
