2000 Ford TS-50 vs. 2006 Ford Ranger
To start off, 2006 Ford Ranger is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Ford TS-50. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Ford TS-50 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 20 more horse power than 2000 Ford TS-50. (128 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 2000 Ford TS-50. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Ford Ranger weights approximately 434 kg more than 2000 Ford TS-50. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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) has 69 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Ford TS-50. (175 Nm). This means 2006 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Ford TS-50.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Ford TS-50 | 2006 Ford Ranger | |
Make | Ford | Ford |
Model | TS-50 | Ranger |
Year Released | 2000 | 2006 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1989 cc | 2983 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 128 HP | 148 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4900 RPM |
Torque | 175 Nm | 244 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 1208 kg | 1642 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 3200 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 132 L | 74 L |