Ford Ranger 2015 vs Toyota Land Cruiser 2002
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 12.8 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): | 8.5 | 10.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.0 l/100km | 10.5 l/100km | |
|
By specification Ford Ranger consumes 1.9 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 285 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Ford Ranger consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Land Cruiser. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 87 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 940 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 720 km with real consumption | 820 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 (€): | 31 200 | 9200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Ranger has
|
Toyota Land Cruiser has
| |