2004 Ford Ranger vs. 2010 Saturn Outlook
To start off, 2010 Saturn Outlook is newer by 6 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 3,564 cc (6 cylinders), 2010 Saturn Outlook is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Saturn Outlook (277 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 129 more horse power than 2004 Ford Ranger. (148 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Saturn Outlook should accelerate faster than 2004 Ford Ranger.
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, 2010 Saturn Outlook, 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, 2010 Saturn Outlook (253 Nm) has 2 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Ford Ranger. (251 Nm). This means 2010 Saturn Outlook will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Ford Ranger.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Ford Ranger | 2010 Saturn Outlook | |
| Make | Ford | Saturn |
| Model | Ranger | Outlook |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Pickup | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2983 cc | 3564 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 148 HP | 277 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6400 RPM |
| Torque | 251 Nm | 253 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.7:1 | 11.4:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 8 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1990 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.7 L/100km | 9.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.1 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
