2005 Ford Ranger vs. 2002 MCC Crossblade
To start off, 2005 Ford Ranger is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 MCC Crossblade. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 MCC Crossblade would be higher. At 2,499 cc (4 cylinders), 2005 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Ford Ranger (108 HP) has 38 more horse power than 2002 MCC Crossblade. (70 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 2002 MCC Crossblade. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Ford Ranger weights approximately 468 kg more than 2002 MCC Crossblade. 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 2002 MCC Crossblade. 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 (257 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 155 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 MCC Crossblade. (102 Nm @ 3210 RPM). This means 2005 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 MCC Crossblade.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Ford Ranger | 2002 MCC Crossblade | |
| Make | Ford | MCC |
| Model | Ranger | Crossblade |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2002 |
| Engine Size | 2499 cc | 599 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 108 HP | 70 HP |
| Torque | 257 Nm | 102 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 3210 RPM |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1208 kg | 740 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2920 mm | 1810 mm |
