Ford Ranger 2010 vs Nissan Navara 2005
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 2.5 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 143 HP | 174 HP | |
| Torque: | 330 NM | 403 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.7 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
|
Nissan Navara is a more dynamic driving. Ford Ranger engine produces 31 HP less power than Nissan Navara, whereas torque is 73 NM less than Nissan Navara. Due to the lower power, Ford Ranger reaches 100 km/h speed 3.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.4 | 9.2 | |
|
The Nissan Navara is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Ford Ranger consumes 1.2 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 180 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 670 km in combined cycle | 860 km in combined cycle | |
| 770 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: | 1.79 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.76 m | 1.78 m | |
|
Ford Ranger is smaller. Ford Ranger is 14 cm shorter than the Nissan Navara, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Ranger is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 1500 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 12.6 meters | 13.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Ranger is 0.7 metres less than that of the Nissan Navara, which means Ford Ranger can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 3`000 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 7600 | 6800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Ranger has
|
Nissan Navara has
| |