Model Year | 2016 | 2006 | |
Model | Audi Q7 | Ford Ranger | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | |||
Difference | |||
Total Legroom | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in |
2016 Audi Q7 Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
Now that the Audi Q7's price and styling have been given their due, my other "why nots" are much less clear cut. You sit SUV-high in the new Audi Q7, even higher (if memory serves) than in the Volvo, and certainly higher than in the relatively car-like Acura. While the commanding view over traffic will appeal to many drivers, they're less likely to enjoy the Q7's high floor. The step up won't be an easy one for shorter or older drivers. They'll want running boards. For such a beamy vehicle, with about two inches more shoulder room than in the far-from-narrow Volvo XC90, the Audi Q7 has unexpectedly little stretch out room in the front seats. The culprit: an unusually high and wide center console. The XC90, with a much narrower and lower console, feels roomier--but not as sporty. see full Audi Q7 review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2016 Audi Q7.
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 |