2000 Ford Ranger vs. 2011 Holden Commodore
To start off, 2011 Holden Commodore is newer by 11 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Ford Ranger. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Ford Ranger would be higher. At 2,564 cc (6 cylinders), 2011 Holden Commodore is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2011 Holden Commodore (240 HP) has 105 more horse power than 2000 Ford Ranger. (135 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2011 Holden Commodore should accelerate faster than 2000 Ford Ranger.
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 Ford Ranger (250 Nm) has 10 more torque (in Nm) than 2011 Holden Commodore. (240 Nm). This means 2000 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2011 Holden Commodore.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Ford Ranger | 2011 Holden Commodore | |
| Make | Ford | Holden |
| Model | Ranger | Commodore |
| Year Released | 2000 | 2011 |
| Body Type | Pickup | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1998 cc | 2564 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 135 HP | 240 HP |
| Torque | 250 Nm | 240 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 3 seats | 5 seats |
