2005 Ford Ranger vs. 2003 Rolls-Royce Phantom
To start off, 2005 Ford Ranger is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Rolls-Royce Phantom. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Rolls-Royce Phantom would be higher. At 6,749 cc (12 cylinders), 2003 Rolls-Royce Phantom is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Rolls-Royce Phantom (454 HP @ 5350 RPM) has 301 more horse power than 2005 Ford Ranger. (153 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Rolls-Royce Phantom should accelerate faster than 2005 Ford Ranger. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Rolls-Royce Phantom weights approximately 1174 kg more than 2005 Ford Ranger. 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 2003 Rolls-Royce Phantom. 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, 2003 Rolls-Royce Phantom (721 Nm) has 469 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Ford Ranger. (252 Nm). This means 2003 Rolls-Royce Phantom will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Ford Ranger.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Ford Ranger | 2003 Rolls-Royce Phantom | |
| Make | Ford | Rolls-Royce |
| Model | Ranger | Phantom |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2003 |
| Body Type | Pickup | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2983 cc | 6749 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 12 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 153 HP | 454 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5350 RPM |
| Torque | 252 Nm | 721 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 89 mm | 92 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 80 mm | 84.6 mm |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 3 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1311 kg | 2485 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4790 mm | 6090 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 2000 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1740 mm | 1640 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 3580 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 11.2 L/100km | 11 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 24.6 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.1 L/100km | 15.9 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 100 L |
