Ford Ranger 2006 vs Nissan Navara 2010
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 3.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 156 HP | 231 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 550 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.6 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
|
Nissan Navara is a more dynamic driving. Ford Ranger engine produces 75 HP less power than Nissan Navara, whereas torque is 170 NM less than Nissan Navara. Due to the lower power, Ford Ranger reaches 100 km/h speed 4.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.2 | 9.5 | |
|
The Nissan Navara is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Ford Ranger consumes 0.7 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 105 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| 780 km on highway | 1050 km on highway | ||
| Nissan Navara gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Nissan Navara 2010 3.0 engine: The V9X engine stands out due to its unusual 65-degree V-angle. It features a lightweight cast-iron block, aluminum cylinder heads with hydraulic lifters, a variable geometry turbocharger, and a chain-driven timing ... More about Nissan Navara 2010 3.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.08 m | 5.40 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.75 m | 1.79 m | |
|
Ford Ranger is smaller. Ford Ranger is 32 cm shorter than the Nissan Navara, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Ranger is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 1500 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 13.3 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 3`010 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 7200 | 15 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Ranger has
|
Nissan Navara has
| |