Ford Ranger 2006 vs Chrysler Pacifica 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 4.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 143 HP | 257 HP | |
| Torque: | 330 NM | 355 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.5 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Ford Ranger engine produces 114 HP less power than Chrysler Pacifica, whereas torque is 25 NM less than Chrysler Pacifica. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.9 | 12.3 | |
|
The Ford Ranger is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Ford Ranger consumes 3.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler Pacifica, which means that by driving the Ford Ranger over 15,000 km in a year you can save 510 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 87 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 780 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 890 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| Ford Ranger gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Chrysler Pacifica) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Ford Ranger) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 203 mm (8 inches) | 149 mm (5.9 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. Note, however, that this Ford Ranger version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. Choose from eight 4x4 versions of Ford Ranger 2006 if off-road driveability is important to you. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.08 m | 5.05 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 2.01 m | |
| Height: | 1.62 m | 1.74 m | |
| Ford Ranger is 3 cm longer than the Chrysler Pacifica, 30 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Ranger is 12 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 4 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 1500 litres | 370 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 370 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 1500 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 2250 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 12.1 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`900 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 7200 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Ranger has
|
Chrysler Pacifica has
| |