Ford Ranger 2015 vs Nissan Navara 2015
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.3 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 160 HP | 190 HP | |
| Torque: | 385 NM | 450 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 10.8 seconds | |
| Ford Ranger engine produces 30 HP less power than Nissan Navara, whereas torque is 65 NM less than Nissan Navara. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.5 | 7.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.6 l/100km | 10.0 l/100km | |
|
By specification Ford Ranger consumes 0.5 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 75 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Ford Ranger consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Navara. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1060 km in combined cycle | 1140 km in combined cycle | |
| 830 km with real consumption | 800 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.36 m | 5.30 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.81 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Ford Ranger is 6 cm longer than the Nissan Navara, 1 cm wider, while the height of Ford Ranger is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 12.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`200 | 3`010 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 31 200 | 19 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Nissan Navara has
| |