2000 Caterham 21 vs. 1996 Ford Ranger
To start off, 2000 Caterham 21 is newer by 4 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, 2000 Caterham 21 (230 HP @ 8600 RPM) has 112 more horse power than 1996 Ford Ranger. (118 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Caterham 21 should accelerate faster than 1996 Ford Ranger. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Ford Ranger weights approximately 855 kg more than 2000 Caterham 21.
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, 2000 Caterham 21 (210 Nm @ 7200 RPM) has 12 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 Ford Ranger. (198 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2000 Caterham 21 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1996 Ford Ranger.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Caterham 21 | 1996 Ford Ranger | |
Make | Caterham | Ford |
Model | 21 | Ranger |
Year Released | 2000 | 1996 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1794 cc | 2507 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 230 HP | 118 HP |
Engine RPM | 8600 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Torque | 210 Nm | 198 Nm |
Torque RPM | 7200 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 540 kg | 1395 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3860 mm | 4770 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1590 mm | 1770 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2230 mm | 2840 mm |