2005 Ford Ranger vs. 1982 Seat 127
To start off, 2005 Ford Ranger is newer by 23 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Seat 127. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Seat 127 would be higher. At 4,009 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Ford Ranger (206 HP @ 5250 RPM) has 159 more horse power than 1982 Seat 127. (47 HP @ 6200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 1982 Seat 127. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Ford Ranger weights approximately 593 kg more than 1982 Seat 127. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2005 Ford Ranger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1982 Seat 127. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 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, 2005 Ford Ranger (323 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 259 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Seat 127. (64 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 2005 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Seat 127.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Ford Ranger | 1982 Seat 127 | |
Make | Ford | Seat |
Model | Ranger | 127 |
Year Released | 2005 | 1982 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4009 cc | 903 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 206 HP | 47 HP |
Engine RPM | 5250 RPM | 6200 RPM |
Torque | 323 Nm | 64 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 3500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
Vehicle Weight | 1298 kg | 705 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2870 mm | 2230 mm |