2008 Chrysler Neon vs. 2006 Ford Ranger
To start off, 2008 Chrysler Neon is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Ford Ranger. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Ford Ranger would be higher. At 2,983 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Ford Ranger weights approximately 1551 kg more than 2008 Chrysler Neon.
Because 2006 Ford Ranger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2008 Chrysler Neon. 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 (244 Nm @ 3950 RPM) has 67 more torque (in Nm) than 2008 Chrysler Neon. (177 Nm @ 4600 RPM). This means 2006 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2008 Chrysler Neon.
Compare all specifications:
| 2008 Chrysler Neon | 2006 Ford Ranger | |
| Make | Chrysler | Ford |
| Model | Neon | Ranger |
| Year Released | 2008 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1995 cc | 2983 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 149 HP |
| Torque | 177 Nm | 244 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4600 RPM | 3950 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 87.5 mm | 88.9 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 83 mm | 78.7 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.8:1 | 8.5:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 3 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1305 kg | 2856 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4930 mm | 4790 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1490 mm | 1740 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2670 mm | 2840 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 9.2 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 47 L | 64 L |
