2006 Ford Ranger vs. 1982 Plymouth Trail Duster
To start off, 2006 Ford Ranger is newer by 24 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Plymouth Trail Duster. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Plymouth Trail Duster 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 98 more horse power than 1982 Plymouth Trail Duster. (108 HP @ 3600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 1982 Plymouth Trail Duster.
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, 2006 Ford Ranger (324 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 87 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Plymouth Trail Duster. (237 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2006 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Plymouth Trail Duster.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Ford Ranger | 1982 Plymouth Trail Duster | |
| Make | Ford | Plymouth |
| Model | Ranger | Trail Duster |
| Year Released | 2006 | 1982 |
| Body Type | Pickup | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4016 cc | 3678 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 206 HP | 108 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5250 RPM | 3600 RPM |
| Torque | 324 Nm | 237 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 2000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | 4WD | 4WD |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5150 mm | 4700 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1880 mm | 2030 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1780 mm | 1890 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3010 mm | 2700 mm |
