1999 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 2006 Ford Ranger
To start off, 2006 Ford Ranger is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1999 Chevrolet Tracker. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1999 Chevrolet Tracker would be higher. At 2,983 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Ford Ranger (148 HP @ 4900 RPM) has 51 more horse power than 1999 Chevrolet Tracker. (97 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 1999 Chevrolet Tracker.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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, 2006 Ford Ranger (244 Nm @ 3950 RPM) has 105 more torque (in Nm) than 1999 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2006 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1999 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
| 1999 Chevrolet Tracker | 2006 Ford Ranger | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Ford |
| Model | Tracker | Ranger |
| Year Released | 1999 | 2006 |
| Body Type | SUV | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1590 cc | 2983 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 97 HP | 148 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 4900 RPM |
| Torque | 139 Nm | 244 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 3950 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 3 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 4140 mm | 5160 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1770 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1690 mm | 1690 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 3200 mm |
