1983 Ford Ranger vs. 1996 Rover 200
To start off, 1996 Rover 200 is newer by 13 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1983 Ford Ranger. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1983 Ford Ranger 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 2 more horse power than 1996 Rover 200. (143 HP @ 6750 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1983 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 1996 Rover 200.
Because 1983 Ford Ranger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1996 Rover 200. 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.
Compare all specifications:
1983 Ford Ranger | 1996 Rover 200 | |
Make | Ford | Rover |
Model | Ranger | 200 |
Year Released | 1983 | 1996 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3000 cc | 1794 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 145 HP | 143 HP |
Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 6750 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Length | 4690 mm | 3980 mm |