1996 Dodge Ram vs. 2003 Ford Puma
To start off, 2003 Ford Puma is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Dodge Ram. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Dodge Ram would be higher. At 5,200 cc (8 cylinders), 1996 Dodge Ram is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Dodge Ram weights approximately 24 kg more than 2003 Ford Puma.
Because 1996 Dodge Ram is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1996 Dodge Ram. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Ford Puma, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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 Dodge Ram (447 Nm) has 301 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Ford Puma. (146 Nm). This means 1996 Dodge Ram will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Ford Puma.
Compare all specifications:
| 1996 Dodge Ram | 2003 Ford Puma | |
| Make | Dodge | Ford |
| Model | Ram | Puma |
| Year Released | 1996 | 2003 |
| Body Type | Pickup | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5200 cc | 1796 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 99 HP |
| Torque | 447 Nm | 146 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1062 kg | 1038 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5700 mm | 3990 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2020 mm | 1680 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3530 mm | 2450 mm |
