Model Year | 2015 | 2003 | |
Model | Chrysler 200 | Ford Ranger | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | |||
Difference | |||
Total Legroom | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in |
2015 Chrysler 200 Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
The Chrysler 200 shares its basic structure with the compact Dodge Dart. This basis is most evident in the back seat, where legroom is decent but hiproom is considerably tighter than in most midsize sedans. Thanks to the stylish roof line, rear headroom is also in short supply. The Fusion's rear seat isn't nearly the roomiest in the class, but it is roomier and more comfortable than the Chrysler's. If you need a truly roomy rear seat and all-wheel-drive in a somewhat affordable midsize sedan, buy the Legacy. see full Chrysler 200 review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2015 Chrysler 200.
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 |