Ford Ranger 2015 vs Nissan Navara 2010
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.2 Diesel | 2.5 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 200 HP | 190 HP | |
| Torque: | 470 NM | 403 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 11.7 seconds | |
| Ford Ranger engine produces 10 HP more power than Nissan Navara, whereas torque is 67 NM more than Nissan Navara. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.5 | 8.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.0 l/100km | 9.6 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Navara is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Ranger consumes 0.2 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 30 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Ranger consumes 1.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Navara. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 940 km in combined cycle | 960 km in combined cycle | |
| 720 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.36 m | 5.22 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.79 m | |
|
Ford Ranger is larger. Ford Ranger is 14 cm longer than the Nissan Navara, 1 cm wider, while the height of Ford Ranger is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 13.2 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`200 | 2`805 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 24 800 | 14 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Nissan Navara has
| |