2009 Ford Ranger vs. 2013 Mini Countryman
To start off, 2013 Mini Countryman is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2009 Ford Ranger. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2009 Ford Ranger would be higher. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Mini Countryman weights approximately 458 kg more than 2009 Ford Ranger.
Because 2013 Mini Countryman is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Ford Ranger. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Mini Countryman 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, 2009 Ford Ranger (323 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 42 more torque (in Nm) than 2013 Mini Countryman. (281 Nm @ 5600 RPM). This means 2009 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2013 Mini Countryman.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Ford Ranger | 2013 Mini Countryman | |
Make | Ford | Mini |
Model | Ranger | Countryman |
Year Released | 2009 | 2013 |
Body Type | Pickup | Crossover |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 207 HP | 0 HP |
Engine RPM | 5250 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 323 Nm | 281 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 5600 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | AWD |
Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1022 kg | 1480 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5180 mm | 4133 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1996 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1690 mm | 1549 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3200 mm | 2595 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 11.2 L/100km | 6.2 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 15.7 L/100km | 9.4 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 74 L | 47 L |