Mazda BT-50 2015 vs Ford Ranger 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.2 Diesel | 3.2 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 200 HP | 200 HP | |
| Torque: | 470 NM | 470 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 10.3 seconds | |
| Mazda BT-50 and Ford Ranger have the same engine power, the torque is the same for both cars. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.9 | 9.5 | |
|
The Mazda BT-50 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda BT-50 consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Ranger, which means that by driving the Mazda BT-50 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 890 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| Mazda BT-50 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.37 m | 5.36 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.82 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda BT-50 is 1 cm longer than the Ford Ranger, width is practically the same also the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 1210 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 12.4 meters | 12.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda BT-50 is 0.3 metres less than that of the Ford Ranger. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`200 | 1`109 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 19 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda BT-50 has
|
| |