2006 Ford Ranger vs. 2002 Mazda 2
To start off, 2006 Ford Ranger is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Mazda 2. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Mazda 2 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 77 more horse power than 2002 Mazda 2. (66 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 2002 Mazda 2.
Because 2006 Ford Ranger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2002 Mazda 2. 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 49 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Mazda 2. (160 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2006 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Mazda 2.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Ford Ranger | 2002 Mazda 2 | |
Make | Ford | Mazda |
Model | Ranger | 2 |
Year Released | 2006 | 2002 |
Body Type | Pickup | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2299 cc | 1399 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 143 HP | 66 HP |
Engine RPM | 5250 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Torque | 209 Nm | 160 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3750 RPM | 2000 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 87.4 mm | 73.7 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 94 mm | 82 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.7:1 | 18.0:1 |
Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4820 mm | 3930 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1690 mm | 1690 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1770 mm | 1550 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2840 mm | 2500 mm |