| 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
2014 Chevrolet Spark and 2006 Ford Ranger Specifications
| Model Year | 2014 | 2006 | |
| Model | Chevrolet Spark | Ford Ranger | |
| Engine | |||
| Transmission | |||
| Drivetrain | |||
| Body | |||
| Difference | |||
| Total Legroom | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in |
TrueDelta Reviews the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2014 Chevrolet Spark
| 2014 Chevrolet Spark Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
| Year | Comment | |
| 2013 | Actually, just room. The firm, thinly padded rear seat provides minimal comfort. But there's more rear legroom than in quite a few larger cars. A Ford Focus, two size classes up, offers two fewer inches. Chevrolet's own Cruze offers just a few tenths of a inch more. see full Chevrolet Spark review | |
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2014 Chevrolet Spark
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2014 Chevrolet Spark.
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2006 Ford Ranger
| 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 |
See TrueDelta's information for all Hatchbacks
See TrueDelta's information for all Chevrolet models.
