1964 Austin Princess vs. 1995 Ford Ranger
To start off, 1995 Ford Ranger is newer by 31 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Austin Princess. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Austin Princess would be higher. At 4,014 cc (6 cylinders), 1995 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1995 Ford Ranger (159 HP @ 4200 RPM) has 40 more horse power than 1964 Austin Princess. (119 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1995 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 1964 Austin Princess. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1964 Austin Princess weights approximately 725 kg more than 1995 Ford Ranger.
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, 1995 Ford Ranger (305 Nm @ 3750 RPM) has 54 more torque (in Nm) than 1964 Austin Princess. (251 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 1995 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1964 Austin Princess.
Compare all specifications:
1964 Austin Princess | 1995 Ford Ranger | |
Make | Austin | Ford |
Model | Princess | Ranger |
Year Released | 1964 | 1995 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3993 cc | 4014 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 119 HP | 159 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 4200 RPM |
Torque | 251 Nm | 305 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 3750 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 2180 kg | 1455 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5470 mm | 4770 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 1770 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1780 mm | 1650 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3360 mm | 2840 mm |