2004 Ford Ranger vs. 1996 Jeep Grand Cherokee
To start off, 2004 Ford Ranger is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Jeep Grand Cherokee. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Jeep Grand Cherokee would be higher. At 4,015 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Ford Ranger (207 HP) has 22 more horse power than 1996 Jeep Grand Cherokee. (185 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 1996 Jeep Grand Cherokee. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Jeep Grand Cherokee weights approximately 440 kg more than 2004 Ford Ranger.
Both vehicles are four wheel drive (4WD) - it offers better handling, traction, and control in all driving conditions compared with front wheel drive or rear 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, 2004 Ford Ranger (323 Nm) has 18 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 Jeep Grand Cherokee. (305 Nm). This means 2004 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1996 Jeep Grand Cherokee.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Ford Ranger | 1996 Jeep Grand Cherokee | |
Make | Ford | Jeep |
Model | Ranger | Grand Cherokee |
Year Released | 2004 | 1996 |
Body Type | Pickup | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4015 cc | 3963 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 207 HP | 185 HP |
Torque | 323 Nm | 305 Nm |
Drive Type | 4WD | 4WD |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1208 kg | 1648 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5130 mm | 4490 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1770 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1730 mm | 1650 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3200 mm | 2700 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 74 L | 87 L |