2000 Ford Ranger vs. 1951 Triumph Renown
To start off, 2000 Ford Ranger is newer by 49 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1951 Triumph Renown. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1951 Triumph Renown would be higher. At 2,088 cc (4 cylinders), 1951 Triumph Renown is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Ford Ranger (135 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 68 more horse power than 1951 Triumph Renown. (67 HP @ 4200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 1951 Triumph Renown. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Ford Ranger weights approximately 14 kg more than 1951 Triumph Renown. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2000 Ford Ranger (250 Nm) has 103 more torque (in Nm) than 1951 Triumph Renown. (147 Nm). This means 2000 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1951 Triumph Renown.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Ford Ranger | 1951 Triumph Renown | |
| Make | Ford | Triumph |
| Model | Ranger | Renown |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1951 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1998 cc | 2088 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 135 HP | 67 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4200 RPM |
| Torque | 250 Nm | 147 Nm |
| Number of Seats | 3 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1298 kg | 1284 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4770 mm | 4450 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1630 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1740 mm | 1610 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2800 mm | 2750 mm |
