Ford Ranger Ford Ranger 2000 Ford Mustang Ford Mustang 2013

We are 103,000+ car owners sharing real-world car information.

Join Us

Ford Ranger (2000) vs. Ford Mustang (2013) Specs

How powerful is the engine? How much room is in the back seat? Get the 2000 Ford Ranger and 2013 Ford Mustang specs.

2000 Ford Ranger and 2013 Ford Mustang Specifications

Model Year 2000 2013  
Model Ford Ranger Ford Mustang  
Engine  
Transmission  
Drivetrain  
Body  
      Difference
Total Legroom 0 in (over 1 rows) 0 in (over 1 rows) 0 in

Return to top

What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2000 Ford Ranger

2000 Ford Ranger Seat Room and Comfort: Cons
YearBody/PowertrainComment
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 2013 Ford Mustang

2013 Ford Mustang Seat Room and Comfort: Pros
YearBody/PowertrainComment
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
2013 Ford Mustang Seat Room and Comfort: Cons
YearBody/PowertrainComment
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
 
See TrueDelta's information for all Pickups
See TrueDelta's information for all Ford models.