| 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
2000 Ford Ranger and 2010 Mazda CX-9 Specifications
| Model Year | 2000 | 2010 | |
| Model | Ford Ranger | Mazda CX-9 | |
| 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 Mazda CX-9
| 2010 Mazda CX-9 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
| Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
| 2011 | 4dr SUV 273-horsepower 3.7L V6 6-speed shiftable automatic FWD |
Seat hugs in the right places without being cumbersome. Headrest position is much better than the midsize GM vehicles I test-drove (Chevy Traverse, GMC Acadia, Buick Enclave). see full Mazda CX-9 review |
| 2009 | 4dr SUV 273-horsepower 3.7L V6 6-speed shiftable automatic AWD |
Easy access to third row, good leg room in second and third row. see full Mazda CX-9 review |
| 2009 | 4dr SUV 273-horsepower 3.7L V6 6-speed shiftable automatic AWD |
Access to the 3rd row is better than any other 7 passenger SUV I drove. see full Mazda CX-9 review |
See TrueDelta's information for all Pickups
See TrueDelta's information for all Ford models.
