2005 Dodge Dakota vs. 2012 Ford Falcon
To start off, 2012 Ford Falcon is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Dodge Dakota. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Dodge Dakota would be higher. At 3,983 cc (6 cylinders), 2012 Ford Falcon is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Ford Falcon (261 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 51 more horse power than 2005 Dodge Dakota. (210 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 2005 Dodge Dakota. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Dodge Dakota weights approximately 133 kg more than 2012 Ford Falcon.
Let's talk about torque, 2012 Ford Falcon (391 Nm) has 71 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Dodge Dakota. (320 Nm). This means 2012 Ford Falcon will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Dodge Dakota.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Dodge Dakota | 2012 Ford Falcon | |
| Make | Dodge | Ford |
| Model | Dakota | Falcon |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Pickup | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3704 cc | 3983 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 210 HP | 261 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 320 Nm | 391 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 93 mm | 92.3 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 91 mm | 99.3 mm |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1837 kg | 1704 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5560 mm | 4955 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1868 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1750 mm | 1453 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3340 mm | 2838 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.7 L/100km | 7.6 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.1 L/100km | 9.9 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 83 L | 68 L |
