2006 Ford Ranger vs. 2000 MCC ForTwo
To start off, 2006 Ford Ranger is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 MCC ForTwo. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 MCC ForTwo 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 103 more horse power than 2000 MCC ForTwo. (40 HP @ 4200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 2000 MCC ForTwo.
Because 2006 Ford Ranger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2000 MCC ForTwo. 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 109 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 MCC ForTwo. (100 Nm @ 1800 RPM). This means 2006 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 MCC ForTwo.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Ford Ranger | 2000 MCC ForTwo | |
Make | Ford | MCC |
Model | Ranger | ForTwo |
Year Released | 2006 | 2000 |
Body Type | Pickup | Convertible |
Engine Position | Front | Rear |
Engine Size | 2299 cc | 799 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 143 HP | 40 HP |
Engine RPM | 5250 RPM | 4200 RPM |
Torque | 209 Nm | 100 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3750 RPM | 1800 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Length | 4820 mm | 2510 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1690 mm | 1550 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1770 mm | 1540 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2840 mm | 1810 mm |