1982 Audi UR vs. 2006 Ford Ranger
To start off, 2006 Ford Ranger is newer by 24 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Audi UR. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Audi UR would be higher. At 2,299 cc (4 cylinders), 2006 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1982 Audi UR (197 HP @ 5800 RPM) has 54 more horse power than 2006 Ford Ranger. (143 HP @ 5250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1982 Audi UR should accelerate faster than 2006 Ford Ranger.
Both vehicles are four wheel drive (4WD) - it offers better handling, traction, and control in all driving conditions compared with front wheel drive or rear 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, 1982 Audi UR (270 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 61 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Ford Ranger. (209 Nm @ 3750 RPM). This means 1982 Audi UR will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Ford Ranger.
Compare all specifications:
1982 Audi UR | 2006 Ford Ranger | |
Make | Audi | Ford |
Model | UR | Ranger |
Year Released | 1982 | 2006 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2226 cc | 2299 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 5 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 197 HP | 143 HP |
Engine RPM | 5800 RPM | 5250 RPM |
Torque | 270 Nm | 209 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 3750 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | 4WD | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 4820 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1690 mm | 1690 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1390 mm | 1770 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2530 mm | 2840 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 58 L | 59 L |