| 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
2000 Ford Ranger and 2010 Dodge Dakota Specifications
| Model Year | 2000 | 2010 | |
| Model | Ford Ranger | Dodge Dakota | |
| 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 2000 Ford Ranger
| 2000 Ford Ranger Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
| Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
| 2001 | 2dr Regular Cab 6ft bed 119-horsepower 2.5L I4 5-speed manual RWD |
Standard cab leg room not good for anyone over 6 ft see full Ford Ranger review |
| 2000 | 4dr Extended Cab 6ft bed 150-horsepower 3.0L V6 4-speed automatic 4WD, part-time w/low range |
Too small for anyone over the age of ten. see full Ford Ranger review |
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2010 Dodge Dakota
| 2010 Dodge Dakota Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
| Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
| 2010 | 4dr Crew Cab 5.5ft bed 302-horsepower 4.7L V8 5-speed automatic 4WD, part-time w/low range |
Cheap, cramped and very uncomfortable. see full Dodge Dakota review |
| 2010 | 4dr Crew Cab 5.5ft bed 302-horsepower 4.7L V8 5-speed automatic 4WD, part-time w/low range |
Passengers noticed very cramped in comparison to the Ridgleine see full Dodge Dakota review |
See TrueDelta's information for all Pickups
See TrueDelta's information for all Ford models.
