Model Year | 2006 | 2010 | |
Model | Ford Ranger | smart fortwo | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | |||
Difference | |||
Total Legroom | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in |
2006 Ford Ranger Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2007 | 2dr Extended Cab 6ft bed 148-horsepower 3.0L V6 5-speed automatic RWD |
The rear jump seats are suitable only for children. see full Ford Ranger review |
2005 | 4dr Extended Cab 6ft bed 207-horsepower 4.0L V6 5-speed automatic 4WD, part-time w/low range |
Rear compartment of Ranger extended cab is smaller and has side-facing jumpseats. see full Ford Ranger review |
2010 smart fortwo Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2009 | 2dr Convertible 70-horsepower 1.0L I3 5-speed automated manual RWD |
Roomy, sits high see full smart fortwo review |
2009 | 2dr Hatch 70-horsepower 1.0L I3 5-speed automated manual RWD |
comfortable driving position. see full smart fortwo review |
2009 | 2dr Hatch 70-horsepower 1.0L I3 5-speed automated manual RWD |
firm and supportive as needed, minimal seat fatigue on long drives see full smart fortwo review |
2010 smart fortwo Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2009 | 2dr Convertible 70-horsepower 1.0L I3 5-speed automated manual RWD |
There is no rear seat. Fortwo mean for 2 people. No surprises. see full smart fortwo review |