Land Rover Range Rover 2010 vs Ford Ranger 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.4 Diesel | 2.5 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 313 HP | 143 HP | |
| Torque: | 700 NM | 330 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.8 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover is more dynamic to drive. Land Rover Range Rover engine produces 170 HP more power than Ford Ranger, whereas torque is 370 NM more than Ford Ranger. Thanks to more power Land Rover Range Rover reaches 100 km/h speed 4.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.4 | 8.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.2 l/100km | 9.4 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Ranger is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Land Rover Range Rover consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Ranger, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Land Rover Range Rover could require 75 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Land Rover Range Rover consumes 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Ranger. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 100 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1060 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 1210 km on highway | 800 km on highway | ||
| 890 km with real consumption | 670 km with real consumption | ||
| Land Rover Range Rover gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.97 m | 5.08 m | |
| Width: | no data | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | no data | 1.76 m | |
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 1500 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 13 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`200 | 3`020 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 15 200 | 7600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover has
|
Ford Ranger has
| |