Model Year | 2000 | 2012 | |
Model | Ford Ranger | Volvo C30 | |
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 Volvo C30 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2012 | 2dr Hatch turbocharged 227hp 2.5L I5 6-speed manual FWD |
The front seats are wonderful. I tend to get stiff and sore when I sit too long in a car, especially my old VW GTI and our other VW Passat wagon. These seats in the C30 are very comfortable and I felt good getting out after a long drive. see full Volvo C30 review |
2011 | 2dr Hatch turbocharged 227hp 2.5L I5 5-speed shiftable automatic FWD |
Excellent support for very long drives. Passengers in the rear say the same. see full Volvo C30 review |
2012 Volvo C30 Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2011 | 2dr Hatch turbocharged 227hp 2.5L I5 5-speed shiftable automatic FWD |
Lack of leg room. This car is a two seater. see full Volvo C30 review |