2005 Ford Ranger vs. 2012 Mazda BT-50
To start off, 2012 Mazda BT-50 is newer by 7 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, both vehicles can yield 108 horse power. So under normal driving conditions, the acceleration of both vehicles should be relatively similar. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Ford Ranger weights approximately 253 kg more than 2012 Mazda BT-50.
Both vehicles are four wheel drive (4WD) - it offers better handling, traction, and control in all driving conditions compared with front wheel drive or rear wheel drive vehicles. 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 5 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Mazda BT-50. (257 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2005 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Mazda BT-50.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Ford Ranger | 2012 Mazda BT-50 | |
Make | Ford | Mazda |
Model | Ranger | BT-50 |
Year Released | 2005 | 2012 |
Body Type | Pickup | Pickup |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2499 cc | 2498 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 3 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 108 HP | 108 HP |
Engine RPM | 3500 RPM | 3500 RPM |
Torque | 262 Nm | 257 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 2000 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 19.8:1 | 19.8:1 |
Fuel Type | Diesel | Diesel |
Drive Type | 4WD | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1208 kg | 955 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 3010 mm | 3010 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 82 L | 50 L |