Ford Ranger 2012 vs Toyota Land Cruiser 2002
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 2.2 - 3.2 (diesel) | 3.0 - 4.0 (petrol, diesel) | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 - 200 HP | 163 - 249 HP | |
| Torque: | 375 - 470 NM | 343 - 410 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.3 - 12.6 seconds | 9.5 - 12.8 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.5 - 10.4 | 9.0 - 13.6 | |
|
On average, Ford Ranger equipped with diesel engines consume 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Land Cruiser. 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 | 4.85 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.90 m | |
| Ford Ranger is 51 cm longer than the Toyota Land Cruiser, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Ranger is 9 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 1210 litres | 620 litres | |
|
Ford Ranger has more luggage capacity. Ford Ranger has 590 litres more trunk space than the Toyota Land Cruiser. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.7 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Ranger is 1.3 metres more than that of the Toyota Land Cruiser, which means Ford Ranger can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`123 | ~ 2`800 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 19 200 | 8400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Ranger has
|
Toyota Land Cruiser has
| |