Model Year | 2013 | 2006 | |
Model | Cadillac ATS | Ford Ranger | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | |||
Difference | |||
Total Legroom | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in |
2013 Cadillac ATS Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
The latest 3-Series has a roomy, comfortable back seat. Cadillac didn't see this coming, and sized the ATS to compete with the previous-generation BMW. Consequently, the Cadillac's rear seat is considerably tighter than the BMW's or the Infiniti G37's, a little tighter than an A4's, about even with that in a C-Class, and roomier than that in a Lexus IS. If you want adults to be comfortable in back, the ATS isn't your car, but neither are most of the cars it competes with. see full Cadillac ATS review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2013 Cadillac ATS.
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 |