1996 Dodge Dakota vs. 2010 Ford Ranger
To start off, 2010 Ford Ranger is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Dodge Dakota. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Dodge Dakota would be higher. At 4,000 cc (6 cylinders), 2010 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Ford Ranger (207 HP @ 5250 RPM) has 89 more horse power than 1996 Dodge Dakota. (118 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 1996 Dodge Dakota.
Because 1996 Dodge Dakota is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2010 Ford Ranger. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Dodge Dakota 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, 2010 Ford Ranger (322 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 126 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 Dodge Dakota. (196 Nm @ 3250 RPM). This means 2010 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1996 Dodge Dakota.
Compare all specifications:
1996 Dodge Dakota | 2010 Ford Ranger | |
Make | Dodge | Ford |
Model | Dakota | Ranger |
Year Released | 1996 | 2010 |
Body Type | Pickup | Pickup |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2458 cc | 4000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 118 HP | 207 HP |
Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 5250 RPM |
Torque | 196 Nm | 322 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3250 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Length | 4980 mm | 5171 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1763 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1670 mm | 1684 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2850 mm | 3193 mm |