2006 Ford Ranger vs. 1964 Mini Countryman
To start off, 2006 Ford Ranger is newer by 42 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Mini Countryman. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Mini Countryman would be higher. At 2,299 cc (4 cylinders), 2006 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Ford Ranger (143 HP @ 5250 RPM) has 109 more horse power than 1964 Mini Countryman. (34 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 1964 Mini Countryman.
Because 2006 Ford Ranger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1964 Mini Countryman. 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, 2006 Ford Ranger (209 Nm @ 3750 RPM) has 149 more torque (in Nm) than 1964 Mini Countryman. (60 Nm @ 2900 RPM). This means 2006 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1964 Mini Countryman.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Ford Ranger | 1964 Mini Countryman | |
Make | Ford | Mini |
Model | Ranger | Countryman |
Year Released | 2006 | 1964 |
Body Type | Pickup | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2299 cc | 848 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 143 HP | 34 HP |
Engine RPM | 5250 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 209 Nm | 60 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3750 RPM | 2900 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4820 mm | 3310 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1690 mm | 1420 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1770 mm | 1370 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2840 mm | 2140 mm |