2006 Ford Ranger vs. 2006 Mazda 3
To start off, both 2006 Ford Ranger and 2006 Mazda 3 were released in the same year (2006). Therefore the support and the availability on parts for both vehicles should be relatively similar. At 2,499 cc (4 cylinders), 2006 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Mazda 3 (150 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 64 more horse power than 2006 Ford Ranger. (86 HP @ 4200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Mazda 3 should accelerate faster than 2006 Ford Ranger.
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, 2006 Mazda 3, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2006 Mazda 3 (183 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 9 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Ford Ranger. (174 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2006 Mazda 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Ford Ranger.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Ford Ranger | 2006 Mazda 3 | |
Make | Ford | Mazda |
Model | Ranger | 3 |
Year Released | 2006 | 2006 |
Body Type | Pickup | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2499 cc | 1999 cc |
Horse Power | 86 HP | 150 HP |
Engine RPM | 4200 RPM | 6500 RPM |
Torque | 174 Nm | 183 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4670 mm | 4540 mm |
Vehicle Height | 2120 mm | 1470 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2990 mm | 2650 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 7.6 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 80 L | 55 L |