2004 Dodge Dakota vs. 2010 Ford Ranger
To start off, 2010 Ford Ranger is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Dodge Dakota. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Dodge Dakota would be higher. At 4,000 cc (6 cylinders), 2010 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Dodge Dakota (210 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 3 more horse power than 2010 Ford Ranger. (207 HP @ 5250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Dodge Dakota should accelerate faster than 2010 Ford Ranger. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Ford Ranger weights approximately 23 kg more than 2004 Dodge Dakota.
Let's talk about torque, 2010 Ford Ranger (322 Nm) has 3 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Dodge Dakota. (319 Nm). This means 2010 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Dodge Dakota.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Dodge Dakota | 2010 Ford Ranger | |
| Make | Dodge | Ford |
| Model | Dakota | Ranger |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Pickup | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3687 cc | 4000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 210 HP | 207 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 5250 RPM |
| Torque | 319 Nm | 322 Nm |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1641 kg | 1664 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5470 mm | 5171 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1811 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1690 mm | 1720 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3330 mm | 3198 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 10.7 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 76 L | 74 L |
