Model Year | 2004 | 2015 | |
Model | Chevrolet Avalanche | Ford Mustang | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | |||
Difference | |||
Total Legroom | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in |
2004 Chevrolet Avalanche Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2003 | 4dr SUT 285-horsepower 5.3L V8 4-speed automatic 4WD w/low range |
Power adjustable leather seats, adjustable pedals, with driver memory for positioning of all that. Seats were still comfortable after twelve hours of driving, with two 20 minute breaks. see full Chevrolet Avalanche review |
2003 | 4dr SUT 285-horsepower 5.3L V8 4-speed automatic 4WD w/low range |
Three real adults can sit there for hours. Large under-seat space to store backpacks, jackets, etc. Very effective A/C in rear. see full Chevrolet Avalanche review |
2015 Ford Mustang Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
This "why not" should not come as a surprise. Neither the Mustang nor the Audi has much rear legroom. Plus in the Mustang my head was pressed against the rear window, and I'm only 5-9. The Mustang coupe's rear seat is viable only for people up to 5-6 or so in height. The Audi has a little more rear headroom. As does the Mustang convertible. If you will be putting people into the rear seat of the Mustang, you should turn off the "easy entry" feature. When it's activated, this feature automatically motors the seat backward when the engine is shut off, reducing rear legroom to near zero. I was nearly trapped when I turned the engine off while sitting in the back seat to take photos. If you want a V8-powered coupe with a roomy rear seat, get a Dodge Challenger. Both the Mustang and the RS 5 do a better job of transporting luggage than rear seat passengers. Both trunks have about as much capacity as that of the average compact sedan. see full Ford Mustang review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2015 Ford Mustang.