2006 Ford Ranger vs. 1989 Mazda 626
To start off, 2006 Ford Ranger is newer by 17 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1989 Mazda 626. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1989 Mazda 626 would be higher. At 4,016 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 2006 Ford Ranger is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2006 Ford Ranger. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1989 Mazda 626, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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. 2006 Ford Ranger has automatic transmission and 1989 Mazda 626 has manual transmission. 1989 Mazda 626 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2006 Ford Ranger will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Ford Ranger | 1989 Mazda 626 | |
Make | Ford | Mazda |
Model | Ranger | 626 |
Year Released | 2006 | 1989 |
Body Type | Pickup | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4016 cc | 1998 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 3 valves |
Horse Power | 206 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5150 mm | 4460 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1880 mm | 1700 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1780 mm | 1370 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3010 mm | 2520 mm |