1996 Ford Thunderbird 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 Thunderbird. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Ford Thunderbird would be higher. At 4,601 cc (8 cylinders), 1996 Ford Thunderbird is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1996 Ford Thunderbird 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 Thunderbird. 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 Thunderbird | 2004 Ford Ecosport | |
| Make | Ford | Ford |
| Model | Thunderbird | Ecosport |
| Year Released | 1996 | 2004 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4601 cc | 1400 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 67 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5050 mm | 4228 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1980 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1679 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2880 mm | 2490 mm |
