| 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
2010 Chrysler Sebring and 2003 Ford Ranger Specifications
| Model Year | 2010 | 2003 | |
| Model | Chrysler Sebring | 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 2010 Chrysler Sebring
| 2010 Chrysler Sebring Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
| Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
| 2010 | 4dr Sedan 173-horsepower 2.4L I4 4-speed automatic FWD |
Beats Accord in seat comfort. see full Chrysler Sebring 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 Sedans and Convertibles.
See TrueDelta's information for all Chrysler models.
