Ford Ranger 2006 vs Nissan Navara 2005
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 2.5 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 156 HP | 174 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 403 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.6 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
|
Nissan Navara is a more dynamic driving. Ford Ranger engine produces 18 HP less power than Nissan Navara, whereas torque is 23 NM less than Nissan Navara. Due to the lower power, Ford Ranger reaches 100 km/h speed 2.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.2 | 9.2 | |
|
The Nissan Navara is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Ford Ranger consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Navara, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Ranger could require 150 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 860 km in combined cycle | |
| 780 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| Nissan Navara gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.08 m | 5.22 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.75 m | 1.78 m | |
|
Ford Ranger is smaller. Ford Ranger is 15 cm shorter than the Nissan Navara, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Ranger is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 1500 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 13.3 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 3`000 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 7400 | 6200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Nissan Navara has
| |