2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser vs. 2006 Ford Ranger
To start off, 2006 Ford Ranger is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser would be higher. At 2,983 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser (155 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 7 more horse power than 2006 Ford Ranger. (148 HP @ 4900 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser should accelerate faster than 2006 Ford Ranger. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Ford Ranger weights approximately 29 kg more than 2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser.
Because 2006 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 2006 Ford Ranger. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser, 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, 2006 Ford Ranger (244 Nm) has 20 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser. (224 Nm). This means 2006 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser | 2006 Ford Ranger | |
Make | Chrysler | Ford |
Model | PT Cruiser | Ranger |
Year Released | 2005 | 2006 |
Body Type | Convertible | Pickup |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2498 cc | 2983 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 155 HP | 148 HP |
Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 4900 RPM |
Torque | 224 Nm | 244 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 87 mm | 88.9 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 101 mm | 78.7 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.5:1 | 9.3:1 |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 3 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1613 kg | 1642 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4290 mm | 5160 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1770 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1550 mm | 1690 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 3200 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 8.1 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 10.7 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 9.4 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 57 L | 74 L |