| 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
2013 and 2003 Ford Ranger Specifications
| Model Year | 2013 | 2003 | |
| Model | Ford Ranger | ||
| Engine | |||
| Transmission | |||
| Drivetrain | |||
| Body | |||
| Difference | |||
| Total Legroom | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in |
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2013
| 2013 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
| Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
| 2014 | 2dr Coupe turbocharged 320hp 3.0L I6 8-speed shiftable automatic RWD |
The driving position feels natural. Buttons and dials are easily accessible, and everything's adjustable if you need to. After a few-hour drive down highway 1, I noticed that my back didn't hurt like it does on most other cars. The seats aren't that soft to the touch, and are quite supportive in cornering, but they are very well-sculpted. Who knew a congenital back defect could be so useful in car evaluation? see full review |
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2003 Ford Ranger
| 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 |
See TrueDelta's information for all Coupes and Convertibles.
See TrueDelta's information for all BMW models.
