1962 Nissan Cedric vs. 2010 Ford Ranger
To start off, 2010 Ford Ranger is newer by 48 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Nissan Cedric. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Nissan Cedric would be higher. At 2,300 cc (4 cylinders), 2010 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Ford Ranger (143 HP @ 5250 RPM) has 83 more horse power than 1962 Nissan Cedric. (60 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 1962 Nissan Cedric. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Ford Ranger weights approximately 517 kg more than 1962 Nissan Cedric. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2010 Ford Ranger (209 Nm @ 3750 RPM) has 94 more torque (in Nm) than 1962 Nissan Cedric. (115 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 2010 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1962 Nissan Cedric.
Compare all specifications:
| 1962 Nissan Cedric | 2010 Ford Ranger | |
| Make | Nissan | Ford |
| Model | Cedric | Ranger |
| Year Released | 1962 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1488 cc | 2300 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 60 HP | 143 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 5250 RPM |
| Torque | 115 Nm | 209 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3200 RPM | 3750 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Vehicle Weight | 930 kg | 1447 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4420 mm | 5171 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1690 mm | 1763 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1530 mm | 1684 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2540 mm | 3193 mm |
