Ford Ranger 2006 vs Subaru B9 Tribeca 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 3.0 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 (Subaru B9 Tribeca) 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: | 143 HP | 245 HP | |
| Torque: | 330 NM | 297 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
|
Subaru B9 Tribeca is a more dynamic driving. Ford Ranger engine produces 102 HP less power than Subaru B9 Tribeca, but torque is 33 NM more than Subaru B9 Tribeca. Due to the lower power, Ford Ranger reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.9 | 12.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.5 l/100km | 11.9 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Ranger is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Ranger consumes 3.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Subaru B9 Tribeca, which means that by driving the Ford Ranger over 15,000 km in a year you can save 510 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Ranger consumes 2.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Subaru B9 Tribeca. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 700 km in combined cycle | 520 km in combined cycle | |
| 800 km on highway | 620 km on highway | ||
| 660 km with real consumption | 530 km with real consumption | ||
| 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) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.08 m | 4.86 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.76 m | 1.69 m | |
| Ford Ranger is 22 cm longer than the Subaru B9 Tribeca, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Ranger is 7 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 1500 litres | 450 litres | |
|
Ford Ranger has more luggage capacity. Ford Ranger has 1050 litres more trunk space than the Subaru B9 Tribeca. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 13 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Ranger is 1.6 metres more than that of the Subaru B9 Tribeca, which means Ford Ranger can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`020 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 6600 | 3400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Ranger has
|
Subaru B9 Tribeca has
| |