1996 Eagle Vision vs. 2004 Ford Ranger
To start off, 2004 Ford Ranger is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Eagle Vision. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Eagle Vision would be higher. At 2,700 cc (6 cylinders), 1996 Eagle Vision is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Ford Ranger weights approximately 150 kg more than 1996 Eagle Vision.
Because 2004 Ford Ranger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1996 Eagle Vision. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 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:
| 1996 Eagle Vision | 2004 Ford Ranger | |
| Make | Eagle | Ford |
| Model | Vision | Ranger |
| Year Released | 1996 | 2004 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2700 cc | 2300 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 197 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1570 kg | 1720 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5320 mm | 5090 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1910 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1750 mm |
