2005 Ford Ranger vs. 1963 Ford Zodiac
To start off, 2005 Ford Ranger is newer by 42 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Ford Zodiac. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Ford Zodiac would be higher. At 2,553 cc (6 cylinders), 1963 Ford Zodiac is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1963 Ford Zodiac (108 HP @ 4750 RPM) has 4 more horse power than 2005 Ford Ranger. (104 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1963 Ford Zodiac should accelerate faster than 2005 Ford Ranger. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Ford Ranger weights approximately 53 kg more than 1963 Ford Zodiac.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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, 1963 Ford Zodiac (191 Nm @ 2900 RPM) has 19 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Ford Ranger. (172 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 1963 Ford Zodiac will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Ford Ranger.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Ford Ranger | 1963 Ford Zodiac | |
| Make | Ford | Ford |
| Model | Ranger | Zodiac |
| Year Released | 2005 | 1963 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2184 cc | 2553 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 104 HP | 108 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 4750 RPM |
| Torque | 172 Nm | 191 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 2900 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1323 kg | 1270 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2990 mm | 2780 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 80 L | 45 L |
