Model Year | 2006 | 2016 | |
Model | Toyota RAV4 | Ford Mustang | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | 4dr SUV | 2dr Coupe | |
Difference | |||
Wheelbase | 2,659 mm | 2,720 mm | 0 mm |
Length | 4,600 mm | 4,783 mm | 0 mm |
Width | 1,816 mm | 1,915 mm | 0 mm |
Height | 1,684 mm | 1,382 mm | 0 mm |
Curb Weight | 1,497 kg | 1,599 kg | 0 kg |
Fuel Capacity | 60 L | 61 L | -1 L |
Headroom, Row 1 | 1,036 mm | 955 mm | -954 mm |
Shoulder Room, Row 1 | 1,450 mm | 1,430 mm | 0 mm |
Hip Room, Row 1 | 1,367 mm | 1,394 mm | 0 mm |
Legroom, Row 1 | 1,062 mm | 1,067 mm | 0 mm |
Headroom, Row 2 | 1,008 mm | 884 mm | -883 mm |
Shoulder Room, Row 2 | 1,405 mm | 1,326 mm | 0 mm |
Hip Room, Row 2 | 1,331 mm | 1,204 mm | 0 mm |
Legroom, Row 2 | 973 mm | 777 mm | 196 mm |
Headroom, Row 3 | 945 mm | 0 mm | 945 mm |
Shoulder Room, Row 3 | 1,336 mm | 0 mm | 1 mm |
Hip Room, Row 3 | 1,100 mm | 0 mm | 1 mm |
Legroom, Row 3 | 762 mm | 0 mm | 762 mm |
Total Legroom | 2,797 mm (over 3 rows) | 1,844 mm (over 2 rows) | 1 mm |
Cargo Volume, Minimum | 348 L | 382 L | -34 L |
Cargo Volume, Behind R2 | 1,053 L | 13.5 | -12.5 L |
Cargo Volume, Maximum | 2,067 L | 13.5 | -11.5 L |
2006 Toyota RAV4 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2007 | 4dr SUV 269-horsepower 3.5L V6 5-speed automatic AWD |
Seat fits. Bottom long enough to support legs. Molded to body style. Not flat and short. Noticeably better feel to seat than any other vehicle. see full Toyota RAV4 review |
2006 | 4dr SUV 166-horsepower 2.4L I4 4-speed automatic AWD |
Plenty of space to stretch out in, and has sliding seats to adjust the legroom or rear cargo capactity. see full Toyota RAV4 review |
2006 | 4dr SUV 269-horsepower 3.5L V6 5-speed automatic AWD |
Leg room is confortable for large people, not croweded see full Toyota RAV4 review |
2006 | 4dr SUV 269-horsepower 3.5L V6 5-speed automatic AWD |
Excellent rear seat room with sliding rear seat. see full Toyota RAV4 review |
2006 Toyota RAV4 Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2007 | 4dr SUV 166-horsepower 2.4L I4 4-speed automatic AWD |
Has less legroom for second seat passengers compared to CR-V. see full Toyota RAV4 review |
2007 | 4dr SUV 269-horsepower 3.5L V6 5-speed automatic AWD |
Not quite enough steering wheel room. see full Toyota RAV4 review |
2007 | 4dr SUV 269-horsepower 3.5L V6 5-speed automatic AWD |
Needs a little more front seat travel see full Toyota RAV4 review |
2006 | 4dr SUV 269-horsepower 3.5L V6 5-speed automatic FWD |
Interior seems a little more cramped than competing models. see full Toyota RAV4 review |
2016 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 2016 Ford Mustang.