1982 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 1996 Ford Ranger
To start off, 1996 Ford Ranger is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Chevrolet Camaro. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Chevrolet Camaro would be higher. At 2,835 cc (6 cylinders), 1982 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Ford Ranger (118 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 17 more horse power than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro. (101 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1996 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro.
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, 1996 Ford Ranger (198 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 6 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro. (192 Nm @ 2400 RPM). This means 1996 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro.
Compare all specifications:
1982 Chevrolet Camaro | 1996 Ford Ranger | |
Make | Chevrolet | Ford |
Model | Camaro | Ranger |
Year Released | 1982 | 1996 |
Body Type | Coupe | Pickup |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2835 cc | 2507 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 101 HP | 118 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Torque | 192 Nm | 198 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2400 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 4 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4880 mm | 4770 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1770 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2840 mm |