Model Year | 2014 | 2003 | |
Model | Audi A7 / S7 / RS7 | Ford Ranger | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | |||
Difference | |||
Total Legroom | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in |
2014 Audi A7 / S7 / RS7 Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
Among luxury cars, Audis have my least favorite seats. They're less cushy and less coddling than the others. They're firm, and seem to want your body to adapt to them rather than the other way around. In the A7, seat adjustments are limited to the usual plus four-way lumbar. The seat's smallish bolsters are spaced fairly widely, and only frequenting all-you-can-eat buffets can bring them closer. This said, one day I drove the A7 for 600 miles and emerged without a hint of back soreness. So maybe the seats do know what's best for me. Perhaps they could teach a thing or two to the door-mounted arm rest. It's overly firm, and my left elbow did get sore. see full Audi A7 / S7 / RS7 review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2014 Audi A7 / S7 / RS7.
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 |