Model Year | 2010 | 2015 | |
Model | Toyota Highlander | Ford Mustang | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | 4dr SUV | 2dr Coupe | |
Difference | |||
Wheelbase | 109.8 in | 107.1 in | 2.7 in |
Length | 188.4 in | 188.3 in | 0.1 in |
Width | 75.2 in | 75.4 in | -0.2 in |
Height | 68.1 in | 54.4 in | 13.7 in |
Curb Weight | 3847 lb. | 3526 lb. | 321 lb. |
Fuel Capacity | 19.2 gal. | 16.0 gal. | 3.2 gal. |
Headroom, Row 1 | 40.6 in | 37.6 in | 3 in |
Shoulder Room, Row 1 | 59.7 in | 56.3 in | 3.4 in |
Hip Room, Row 1 | 56.7 in | 54.9 in | 1.8 in |
Legroom, Row 1 | 43.2 in | 42.0 in | 1.2 in |
Headroom, Row 2 | 40.1 in | 34.8 in | 5.3 in |
Shoulder Room, Row 2 | 59.5 in | 52.2 in | 7.3 in |
Hip Room, Row 2 | 56.5 in | 47.4 in | 9.1 in |
Legroom, Row 2 | 38.3 in | 30.6 in | 7.7 in |
Headroom, Row 3 | 36.3 in | 0.0 in | 36.3 in |
Shoulder Room, Row 3 | 55.0 in | 0.0 in | 55 in |
Hip Room, Row 3 | 42.3 in | 0.0 in | 42.3 in |
Legroom, Row 3 | 29.2 in | 0.0 in | 29.2 in |
Total Legroom | 110.7 in (over 3 rows) | 72.6 in (over 2 rows) | 38.1 in |
Cargo Volume, Minimum | 10.3 ft3 | 13.5 ft3 | -3.2 ft3 |
Cargo Volume, Behind R2 | 42.3 ft3 | 13.5 | 28.8 ft3 |
Cargo Volume, Maximum | 95.4 ft3 | 13.5 ft3 | 81.9 ft3 |
2010 Toyota Highlander Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2010 | 4dr SUV 187-horsepower 2.7L I4 6-speed shiftable automatic FWD |
Lots of room in the second row, including seats that recline and move back & forth. Having the third row as an option for occasional use was really the deciding factor. see full Toyota Highlander review |
2010 Toyota Highlander Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2011 | 4dr SUV 245-horsepower 3.5L V6 Hybrid CVT AWD |
Third row minimal legroom see full Toyota Highlander review |
2009 | 4dr SUV 270-horsepower 3.5L V6 5-speed shiftable automatic AWD |
Only two seats in the 2nd row, very small leg room in the 3rd row. see full Toyota Highlander review |
2009 | 4dr SUV 270-horsepower 3.5L V6 5-speed shiftable automatic AWD |
seats were hard and flat. Even top of the line luxury model seats were a big disappointment . . . one of the principal reasons we did not choose this vehicle see full Toyota Highlander review |
2015 Ford Mustang Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
This "why not" should not come as a surprise. Neither the Mustang nor the Audi has much rear legroom. Plus in the Mustang my head was pressed against the rear window, and I'm only 5-9. The Mustang coupe's rear seat is viable only for people up to 5-6 or so in height. The Audi has a little more rear headroom. As does the Mustang convertible. If you will be putting people into the rear seat of the Mustang, you should turn off the "easy entry" feature. When it's activated, this feature automatically motors the seat backward when the engine is shut off, reducing rear legroom to near zero. I was nearly trapped when I turned the engine off while sitting in the back seat to take photos. If you want a V8-powered coupe with a roomy rear seat, get a Dodge Challenger. Both the Mustang and the RS 5 do a better job of transporting luggage than rear seat passengers. Both trunks have about as much capacity as that of the average compact sedan. see full Ford Mustang review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2015 Ford Mustang.