Ford Ranger 2015 vs Toyota Land Cruiser 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.2 Diesel | 3.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 200 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 470 NM | 343 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 12.7 seconds | |
| Ford Ranger engine produces 37 HP more power than Toyota Land Cruiser, whereas torque is 127 NM more than Toyota Land Cruiser. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.2 | 9.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.9 l/100km | 10.0 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Ranger is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Ranger consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Land Cruiser, which means that by driving the Ford Ranger over 15,000 km in a year you can save 195 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Ranger consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Land Cruiser. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 87 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 970 km in combined cycle | 910 km in combined cycle | |
| 800 km with real consumption | 860 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.36 m | 4.85 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.90 m | |
| Ford Ranger is 51 cm longer than the Toyota Land Cruiser, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Ranger is 9 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 11.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`200 | 2`800 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 31 800 | 8400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Ranger has
|
Toyota Land Cruiser has
| |