2004 Ford Ranger vs. 1998 Renault Clio
To start off, 2004 Ford Ranger is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1998 Renault Clio. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1998 Renault Clio would be higher. At 2,983 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Ford Ranger (148 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 90 more horse power than 1998 Renault Clio. (58 HP @ 5250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 1998 Renault Clio. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Ford Ranger weights approximately 762 kg more than 1998 Renault Clio. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2004 Ford Ranger is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2004 Ford Ranger. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1998 Renault Clio, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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 (251 Nm) has 158 more torque (in Nm) than 1998 Renault Clio. (93 Nm). This means 2004 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1998 Renault Clio.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Ford Ranger | 1998 Renault Clio | |
| Make | Ford | Renault |
| Model | Ranger | Clio |
| Year Released | 2004 | 1998 |
| Body Type | Pickup | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2983 cc | 1149 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 148 HP | 58 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5250 RPM |
| Torque | 251 Nm | 93 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.7:1 | 9.6:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 3 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1642 kg | 880 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5130 mm | 3780 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1650 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1650 mm | 1420 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3200 mm | 2700 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.7 L/100km | 5.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.1 L/100km | 7.9 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 12.4 L/100km | 6.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 74 L | 50 L |
