Model Year | 2014 | 2003 | |
Model | Ford Ranger | ||
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | |||
Difference | |||
Total Legroom | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in |
2014 Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
While the Acura TLX's exterior dimensions roughly split the difference between the TSX's and the TL's, its interior dimensions are quite close to the more compact of the two. Compared to the Honda Accord, rear seat legroom is down a substantial four inches despite a shared wheelbase. Shoulder room and rear headroom also suffer reductions, of about an inch in each case. At 5-9, I can sit behind myself with a little room to spare. Passengers six feet and up will feel cramped, if they fit at all. The Lincoln is also weak in this area. If others an inch or two more rear knee room than the TLX, but less rear headroom. see full review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2014 .
2003 Ford Ranger Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2004 | 2dr Extended Cab 6ft bed 207-horsepower 4.0L V6 5-speed automatic 4WD, part-time w/low range |
The jump seats in a Ranger are not very practical for long trips what so ever, not much room other than for storage, and they are not comfortable. I think that a Full 4 door model of the Ranger would be great, maybe a redesign will incorporate a backseat see full Ford Ranger review |
2002 | 4dr Extended Cab 6ft bed 207-horsepower 4.0L V6 5-speed manual 4WD, part-time w/low range |
The rear seats are very small but I did not buy it for rear seat comfort. I actually removed the seats to get more storage space behind the front seats. see full Ford Ranger review |