1996 Ford Ranger vs. 2004 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2004 Ford Ecosport is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Ford Ranger. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Ford Ranger would be higher. At 2,507 cc (4 cylinders), 1996 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Ford Ecosport (143 HP) has 25 more horse power than 1996 Ford Ranger. (118 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Ford Ecosport should accelerate faster than 1996 Ford Ranger.
Because 1996 Ford Ranger 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 Ford Ranger. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Ford Ecosport, 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.
Compare all specifications:
1996 Ford Ranger | 2004 Ford Ecosport | |
Make | Ford | Ford |
Model | Ranger | Ecosport |
Year Released | 1996 | 2004 |
Body Type | Pickup | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2507 cc | 2000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 118 HP | 143 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4770 mm | 4228 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1980 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1650 mm | 1679 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2840 mm | 2490 mm |