| 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
2016 Chrysler Grand Voyager and 2003 Ford Ranger Specifications
| Model Year | 2016 | 2003 | |
| Model | Chrysler Grand Voyager | 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 2016 Chrysler Grand Voyager
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2016 Chrysler Grand Voyager.
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 Minivans
See TrueDelta's information for all Chrysler models.
