2006 Ford Ranger vs. 1964 Ford Falcon
To start off, 2006 Ford Ranger is newer by 42 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Ford Falcon. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Ford Falcon would be higher. At 2,983 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1964 Ford Falcon (282 HP @ 4400 RPM) has 133 more horse power than 2006 Ford Ranger. (149 HP @ 4900 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1964 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 2006 Ford Ranger. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Ford Ranger weights approximately 2156 kg more than 1964 Ford Falcon.
Because 2006 Ford Ranger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1964 Ford Falcon. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 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, both vehicles can yield 244 Nm of torque. So under normal driving conditions, the ability to climb up hills and pull heavy equipment should be relatively similar for both vehicles.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Ford Ranger | 1964 Ford Falcon | |
Make | Ford | Ford |
Model | Ranger | Falcon |
Year Released | 2006 | 1964 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2983 cc | 2890 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 149 HP | 282 HP |
Engine RPM | 4900 RPM | 4400 RPM |
Torque | 244 Nm | 244 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3950 RPM | 2800 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 8.5:1 | 20.2:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Number of Seats | 3 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 2856 kg | 700 kg |