2006 Chevrolet Kodiak vs. 2003 Ford F-250
To start off, 2006 Chevrolet Kodiak is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Ford F-250. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Ford F-250 would be higher. At 6,600 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Chevrolet Kodiak is equipped with a bigger engine.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front 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, 2006 Chevrolet Kodiak (820 Nm @ 1600 RPM) has 325 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Ford F-250. (495 Nm @ 3750 RPM). This means 2006 Chevrolet Kodiak will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Ford F-250. 2006 Chevrolet Kodiak has automatic transmission and 2003 Ford F-250 has manual transmission. 2003 Ford F-250 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2006 Chevrolet Kodiak will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Chevrolet Kodiak | 2003 Ford F-250 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Ford |
| Model | Kodiak | F-250 |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2003 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6600 cc | 5408 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 296 HP |
| Torque | 820 Nm | 495 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 1600 RPM | 3750 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 3 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 2000 mm | 2040 mm |
