Dodge Durango 1998 vs Ford Explorer 1995
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Dodge Durango is available with rear wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive, while Ford Explorer can be equipped only with four wheel (4x4) drive. All-wheel drive models tend to consume more fuel, so if you don't need off road capabilities, Dodge Durango also offers 2-wheel drive versions for fuel economy. 2WD versions also have lower maintenance costs. | |||
| Engines: | 3.9 - 5.9 | 4.0 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 177 - 250 HP | 207 HP | |
| Torque: | 305 - 454 NM | 339 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.1 - 20.2 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 14.2 - 19.2 | 13.7 | |
|
Dodge Durango petrol engines consumes on average 2.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than Ford Explorer. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.91 m | 4.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.87 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.80 m | |
| Dodge Durango is 10 cm longer than the Ford Explorer, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Dodge Durango is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 535 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2482 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 11.5 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 2`877 | ~ 2`568 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 3600 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Dodge Durango has
|
Ford Explorer has
| |