2003 Ford Mustang vs. 2010 Ford Ranger
To start off, 2010 Ford Ranger is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 4,599 cc (8 cylinders), 2003 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Ford Mustang (400 HP @ 5750 RPM) has 193 more horse power than 2010 Ford Ranger. (207 HP @ 5250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 2010 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, 2003 Ford Mustang (556 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 234 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Ford Ranger. (322 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2003 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Ford Ranger.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 Ford Mustang | 2010 Ford Ranger | |
| Make | Ford | Ford |
| Model | Mustang | Ranger |
| Year Released | 2003 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Convertible | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4599 cc | 4000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 400 HP | 207 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5750 RPM | 5250 RPM |
| Torque | 556 Nm | 322 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4660 mm | 5171 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1763 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1684 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 3193 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 74 L |
