2005 Ford Ranger vs. 1987 Pontiac Firebird
To start off, 2005 Ford Ranger is newer by 18 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1987 Pontiac Firebird. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1987 Pontiac Firebird would be higher. At 2,825 cc (6 cylinders), 1987 Pontiac Firebird is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1987 Pontiac Firebird (133 HP @ 5100 RPM) has 25 more horse power than 2005 Ford Ranger. (108 HP @ 3500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1987 Pontiac Firebird should accelerate faster than 2005 Ford Ranger.
Because 2005 Ford Ranger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1987 Pontiac Firebird. 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 (262 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 32 more torque (in Nm) than 1987 Pontiac Firebird. (230 Nm @ 3600 RPM). This means 2005 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1987 Pontiac Firebird.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Ford Ranger | 1987 Pontiac Firebird | |
| Make | Ford | Pontiac |
| Model | Ranger | Firebird |
| Year Released | 2005 | 1987 |
| Body Type | Pickup | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2499 cc | 2825 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 3 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 108 HP | 133 HP |
| Engine RPM | 3500 RPM | 5100 RPM |
| Torque | 262 Nm | 230 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 3600 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 19.8:1 | 8.5:1 |
| Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5090 mm | 4850 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3010 mm | 2580 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 82 L | 60 L |
