Ford Ranger 2019 vs Dodge Durango 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 3.6 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Ford Ranger) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Dodge Durango) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 213 HP | 294 HP | |
| Torque: | 500 NM | 353 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Ford Ranger engine produces 81 HP less power than Dodge Durango, but torque is 147 NM more than Dodge Durango. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.9 | 11.2 | |
|
The Ford Ranger is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Ford Ranger consumes 2.3 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 345 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 93 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 890 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| Ford Ranger gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 283 mm (11.1 inches) | 207 mm (8.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Ford Ranger can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
| 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: | 2.03 m | 1.92 m | |
| Height: | 1.87 m | 1.80 m | |
|
Ford Ranger is larger. Ford Ranger is 25 cm longer than the Dodge Durango, 11 cm wider, while the height of Ford Ranger is 7 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | 5 seats | 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, if possible |
no data | 2410 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 12.9 meters | 12.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Ranger is 0.4 metres more than that of the Dodge Durango, which means Ford Ranger can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 3`130 kg | 2`948 kg | |
| Net weight: | 2`510 kg | 2`184 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 620 kg | 764 kg | |
| Ford Ranger load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 23 procentiem less than Dodge Durango. Therefore, Dodge Durango is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 24 800 | 24 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Ranger has
|
Dodge Durango has
| |