1994 Chrysler ES vs. 2006 Ford Ranger
To start off, 2006 Ford Ranger is newer by 12 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1994 Chrysler ES. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1994 Chrysler ES would be higher. At 2,299 cc (4 cylinders), 2006 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Ford Ranger (143 HP @ 5250 RPM) has 50 more horse power than 1994 Chrysler ES. (93 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 1994 Chrysler ES.
Because 2006 Ford Ranger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1994 Chrysler ES. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 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. Let's talk about torque, 2006 Ford Ranger (209 Nm @ 3750 RPM) has 43 more torque (in Nm) than 1994 Chrysler ES. (166 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 2006 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1994 Chrysler ES.
Compare all specifications:
1994 Chrysler ES | 2006 Ford Ranger | |
Make | Chrysler | Ford |
Model | ES | Ranger |
Year Released | 1994 | 2006 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2213 cc | 2299 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 93 HP | 143 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5250 RPM |
Torque | 166 Nm | 209 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3200 RPM | 3750 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 87.5 mm | 87.4 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 92 mm | 94 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 8.1:1 | 9.7:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 2 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4370 mm | 4820 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1690 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1770 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2470 mm | 2840 mm |