Ford Ranger 2022 vs Toyota Tacoma 2023
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: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ford Ranger is available only with four wheel (4x4) drive, while Toyota Tacoma can be equipped with rear wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive. All-wheel drive models tend to consume more fuel, so if you don't need off road capabilities, Toyota Tacoma also offers 2-wheel drive versions for fuel economy. 2WD versions also have lower maintenance costs. | |||
| Engines: | 2.0 - 3.0 (petrol, diesel, hybrid) | 2.4 (petrol, hybrid) | |
| Both cars are available with petrol and hybrid engines. Ford Ranger is available also with diesel engines. Diesel engines typically offer better fuel efficiency and higher torque compared to other engine types. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 170 - 292 HP | 228 - 278 HP | |
| Torque: | 405 - 600 NM | 329 - 430 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.9 - 12.1 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| In general, Toyota Tacoma are available with more powerful and dynamic engines than Ford Ranger. Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 3.2 - 13.8 | 10.2 - 11.8 | |
|
Ford Ranger petrol engines consumes on average 2.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than Toyota Tacoma. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 226 - 266 mm (8.9 - 10.5 inches) | 279 - 292 mm (11 - 11.5 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Toyota Tacoma can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.36 m | 5.41 m | |
| Width: | 2.01 m | 1.98 m | |
| Height: | 1.89 m | 1.89 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Ford Ranger is 5 cm shorter than the Toyota Tacoma, 3 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 13 meters | 14.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Ranger is 1.2 metres less than that of the Toyota Tacoma, which means Ford Ranger can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | ~ 3`276 kg | ~ 2`707 kg | |
| Net weight: | ~ 2`434 kg | ~ 2`042 kg | |
| Load capacity: | ~ 842 kg | ~ 665 kg | |
| Ford Ranger load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 21 procentiem more than Toyota Tacoma. Therefore, Ford Ranger is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 42 000 | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Ranger has
|
Toyota Tacoma has
| |