Ford Ranger 2015 vs Dodge Durango 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.2 Diesel | 3.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 200 HP | 294 HP | |
| Torque: | 470 NM | 353 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Ford Ranger engine produces 94 HP less power than Dodge Durango, but torque is 117 NM more than Dodge Durango. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.5 | 11.2 | |
|
The Ford Ranger is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Ford Ranger consumes 2.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Dodge Durango, which means that by driving the Ford Ranger over 15,000 km in a year you can save 405 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 93 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 940 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| Ford Ranger gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Dodge Durango 2013 3.6 engine: The variable valve timing regulators, oil pump, water pump, and thermostat are known for their limited lifespan. Another common issue is the clogging of oil channels with wear particles.
After ... More about Dodge Durango 2013 3.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.36 m | 5.11 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 1.92 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.80 m | |
| Ford Ranger is 25 cm longer than the Dodge Durango, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Ranger is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | no data | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 490 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 490 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 2410 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 12.5 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`200 | 2`948 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 31 800 | 27 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Ranger has
|
Dodge Durango has
| |