2006 Ford Ranger vs. 1981 Mazda Cosmo
To start off, 2006 Ford Ranger is newer by 25 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1981 Mazda Cosmo. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1981 Mazda Cosmo would be higher. At 4,016 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Ford Ranger (206 HP @ 5250 RPM) has 113 more horse power than 1981 Mazda Cosmo. (93 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 1981 Mazda Cosmo.
Because 2006 Ford Ranger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1981 Mazda Cosmo. 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 (324 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 175 more torque (in Nm) than 1981 Mazda Cosmo. (149 Nm @ 3300 RPM). This means 2006 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1981 Mazda Cosmo.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Ford Ranger | 1981 Mazda Cosmo | |
Make | Ford | Mazda |
Model | Ranger | Cosmo |
Year Released | 2006 | 1981 |
Body Type | Pickup | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4016 cc | 1768 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 206 HP | 93 HP |
Engine RPM | 5250 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 324 Nm | 149 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 3300 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 100.4 mm | 80 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 84.4 mm | 88 mm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5150 mm | 4670 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1880 mm | 1700 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1780 mm | 1420 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3010 mm | 2620 mm |