2004 Ford Ranger vs. 2006 Holden Commodore
To start off, 2006 Holden Commodore is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Ford Ranger. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Ford Ranger would be higher. At 5,976 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Holden Commodore is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Holden Commodore (360 HP) has 153 more horse power than 2004 Ford Ranger. (207 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Holden Commodore should accelerate faster than 2004 Ford Ranger.
Because 2004 Ford Ranger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Holden Commodore. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Ford Ranger will offer significantly more control. 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 33 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Holden Commodore. (290 Nm). This means 2004 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Holden Commodore.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Ford Ranger | 2006 Holden Commodore | |
| Make | Ford | Holden |
| Model | Ranger | Commodore |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Pickup | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4015 cc | 5976 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 207 HP | 360 HP |
| Torque | 323 Nm | 290 Nm |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 14.7 L/100km | 14.4 L/100km |
