2005 Ford Ranger vs. 2011 Fiat Bravo
To start off, 2011 Fiat Bravo is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Ford Ranger. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Ford Ranger 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 @ 3500 RPM) has 4 more horse power than 2011 Fiat Bravo. (104 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 2011 Fiat Bravo. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2011 Fiat Bravo weights approximately 227 kg more than 2005 Ford Ranger.
Because 2005 Ford Ranger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2011 Fiat Bravo. 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, 2011 Fiat Bravo (290 Nm @ 1500 RPM) has 33 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Ford Ranger. (257 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2011 Fiat Bravo will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Ford Ranger.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Ford Ranger | 2011 Fiat Bravo | |
Make | Ford | Fiat |
Model | Ranger | Bravo |
Year Released | 2005 | 2011 |
Body Type | Pickup | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2499 cc | 1598 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 3 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 108 HP | 104 HP |
Engine RPM | 3500 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Torque | 257 Nm | 290 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 1500 RPM |
Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1208 kg | 1435 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2920 mm | 2610 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 132 L | 57 L |