Ford Ranger 2015 vs Nissan Navara 2019
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ford Ranger is available with rear wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive, while Nissan Navara 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, Ford Ranger also offers 2-wheel drive versions for fuel economy. 2WD versions also have lower maintenance costs. | |||
| Engines: | 2.2 - 3.2 | 2.3 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 130 - 200 HP | 163 - 190 HP | |
| Torque: | 330 - 470 NM | 425 - 450 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.3 - 14.9 seconds | 11.2 - 12.5 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.0 - 8.7 | 6.4 - 7.0 | |
|
On average, Ford Ranger equipped with diesel engines consume 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Navara. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.36 m | 5.31 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.80 m | 1.83 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Ford Ranger is 5 cm longer than the Nissan Navara, 1 cm wider, while the height of Ford Ranger is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 12.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 3`200 | ~ 3`250 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 35 200 | 31 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Ranger has
|
Nissan Navara has
| |