Model Year | 2000 | 2012 | |
Model | Ford Ranger | Ford Mustang | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | |||
Difference | |||
Total Legroom | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in |
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 |
2012 Ford Mustang Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2013 | 2dr Coupe 420-horsepower 5.0L V8 6-speed manual RWD |
Without the sunroof, there is adequate headroom, legroom, and hiproom for taller drivers (6'6"+). The seats are supportive and comfortable for longer drives. This car makes a competent "daily driver" in fair weather. see full Ford Mustang review |
2012 Ford Mustang Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2012 | 2dr Coupe 305-horsepower 3.7L V6 6-speed manual RWD |
My dad's 2010 Camaro has much more legroom than my Mustang. 2 more inches would help a lot, though I have to admit even at 6-3, I'm still pretty comfy in the Mustang. The room would be nice to have on trips. see full Ford Mustang review |
2011 | 2dr Coupe 305-horsepower 3.7L V6 6-speed manual RWD |
Felt like seating position was "on the floor". Steering wheel had only tilt adjustment, no telescope. see full Ford Mustang review |