2006 Ford Ranger vs. 2009 Nissan X-Trail
To start off, 2009 Nissan X-Trail is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Ford Ranger. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Ford Ranger would be higher. At 2,499 cc (4 cylinders), 2006 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Nissan X-Trail (137 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 29 more horse power than 2006 Ford Ranger. (108 HP @ 3500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Nissan X-Trail should accelerate faster than 2006 Ford Ranger.
Let's talk about torque, 2006 Ford Ranger (257 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 59 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Nissan X-Trail. (198 Nm @ 4400 RPM). This means 2006 Ford Ranger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Nissan X-Trail.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Ford Ranger | 2009 Nissan X-Trail | |
Make | Ford | Nissan |
Model | Ranger | X-Trail |
Year Released | 2006 | 2009 |
Body Type | Pickup | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2499 cc | 1997 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 3 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 108 HP | 137 HP |
Engine RPM | 3500 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Torque | 257 Nm | 198 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 4400 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 19.8:1 | 10.0:1 |
Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4670 mm | 4640 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1690 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3010 mm | 2640 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 6.1 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 82 L | 65 L |