Model Year | 2012 | 2006 | |
Model | Ford Ranger | ||
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | |||
Difference | |||
Total Legroom | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in |
2012 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Comment | |
2013 | Step inside, and you'll discover another good reason to buy a Cadillac XTS. The large, cushy (but not at all mushy) front seats are among the most comfortable and supportive you'll find in any car, rivaling the best from BMW, Lexus, and Volvo and easily besting the seats in the Audi and Mercedes. The rear seat of the XTS is also quite comfortable--for two people. Basing the XTS on GM's Epsilon platform, originally created for much smaller cars, has a cost. It's much cheaper and easier to lengthen a platform than to widen one. So the XTS is essentially a stretched midsize sedan rather than a large one. Rear legroom is abundant despite insufficient space for feet beneath the front seats, but the cabin is very much midsize in breadth. The compact Dodge Dart (admittedly wide and heavy for its class) provides as much space for shoulders. see full review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2012 .
2006 Ford Ranger Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2007 | 2dr Extended Cab 6ft bed 148-horsepower 3.0L V6 5-speed automatic RWD |
The rear jump seats are suitable only for children. see full Ford Ranger review |
2005 | 4dr Extended Cab 6ft bed 207-horsepower 4.0L V6 5-speed automatic 4WD, part-time w/low range |
Rear compartment of Ranger extended cab is smaller and has side-facing jumpseats. see full Ford Ranger review |