Ford Ranger vs Nissan Navara

What's the difference?

Our time with the new Ranger was limited in terms of distance driven and the number of variants we could sample. We were also unable to test the vehicle with a trailer attached, so we’re unsure as to how well the new, lower-powered engine will cope with towing duties.

We do know the new engine is being welcomed by owners and fleets who held concerns over the technical layout of the previous 2.0-litre powerplant, but only time will tell if the reduced performance is seen as being balanced by the technical upgrades.

We can also tell you there’s nothing inherently wrong with the new 2.0L in the context of normal driving on normal roads and its refinement is still an improvement on a lot of its competitors’ offerings.

Note: CarsGuide attended this event as a guest of the manufacturer, with meals provided.

The D27 Nissan Navara represents badge engineering at its best or worst, depending on your point of view regarding platform sharing. However, when assessed purely on its merits as a standalone tool of trade, the entry-level SL is a competent and economical workhorse that’s worthy of at least cross-shopping with the major players.

Here’s a classic case of leaving well enough alone. Having figured out for sure that the Ranger’s looks weren’t costing it any sales whatsoever, Ford wisely decided to spend the facelift money where it counted most; under the bonnet.

If you have sharp eyes, you might pick the dark highlights replacing the chrome finish on some models, the new wheel designs and a couple of new hero colours for specific variants.

Beyond that, those big, bold, bluff looks continue with more than the odd nod to the US-market pick-ups that seem to inspire so many ute buyers in this country.

Inside it’s the same story, with those fabulous interior door handles that are so easy to use continuing and everything else remaining very, very Ranger-ish.

It looks like a base model Triton GLX given the Navara SL’s modest front and rear styling tweaks, which are not as substantial nor convincing as platform-sharing rivals like Mazda’s BT-50 or Volkswagen’s Amarok in creating a clear visual distinction from its donor.

Nissan has been equally economical with interior changes. Even so, the work-focused cabin is functional and reasonably spacious for a dual cab, with splashes of satin chrome combined with white upholstery stitching and fake carbon-fibre surfaces providing a touch of style to predominantly grey tones.

Despite the lower-tech new engine and its power losses compared with its predecessor, the 2.0-litre Ranger in dual-cab 4X4 form retains its full 3.5-tonne towing capacity.

Sticking with towing, if you option up the Touring Pack, the Ranger gets Ford’s 'Trailer Reversing Guidance' which uses cameras and the rotary drive-mode dial to allow the driver to take the hassle out of trailer reversing. Up to a point, anyway. But there’s also a great check-list menu on the info-screen to detect failed trailer lighting and other problems. The Touring Pack is now standard on many versions but still optional of cheaper variants.

Which ever version you buy, any dual-cab 4X4 Ranger styleside has a tub measuring 1547mm long, 1584 wide, 1224mm between the wheel arches (to accept a standard pallet) and a loading height of 816mm. The tub also features inner tie-down rails, a light, a tailgate-lift assist ram and cupholders moulded into the tailgate’s inner side.

Payloads for the various Ranger models are determined by kerb mass, which means the lightest variant, the XL can carry 1135kg, while the heaviest, the Platinum, is restricted to 981kg. Still a decent figure, to be honest.

Inside, the Ranger’s cabin ranges from the starkly utilitarian in the XL (vinyl floor mats and cloth seats to name just a couple of features) to extremely plush in the case of the Platinum with its four USB ports, wireless phone charging and even a row of six switch blanks ready for aftermarket accessories.

The front seating is definitely superior to the rear seat in the Ranger, and the latter features a fairly flat cushion and a backrest.

Lesser versions of the Ranger also get a conventional park-brake compared with the electronic one on more expensive models. We’ll take the manual version any day.

With its 2126kg kerb weight and 3190kg GVM our test vehicle has a useful 1064kg payload rating, so it’s a genuine one tonner.

It’s also rated to tow up to the class-benchmark 3500kg of braked trailer but with its 6250kg GCM rating (or how much it can legally carry and tow at the same time) it would require a sizeable 440kg reduction in vehicle payload to tow its maximum trailer weight.

Not that many (if any) owners of utes this size would need to tow 3500kg but it’s important to be aware of these numbers when towing heavy trailers to avoid dangerous and illegal overloading.

The Navara’s load tub is almost square with its 1555mm length and 1545mm width. It’s also 525mm deep and with 1135mm between the rear wheel housings it can’t fit a standard Aussie pallet but will carry a Euro.

Our test vehicle does not come standard with a tub-liner so its painted surfaces are prone to scratches and dents. There’s four anchorage points for securing loads and the tailgate assist feature allows easier lowering and raising.

The driver and front passenger share good space and comfort, with storage that includes a bottle holder and bin in each door plus a large open shelf above the single glovebox and an overhead glasses holder. The centre console offers flat storage with two USB ports and a 12v socket up front, along with two cupholders in the centre and a lidded box at the back.

Rear seating is also comfortable and surprisingly spacious for tall people, given I’m 186cm and when seated behind the driver’s seat when set in my position I have ample knee and headroom. However, shoulder room is tight for three adults, which is tolerable for short trips but a maximum of two would be preferable for longer drives.

Rear passenger storage includes a bottle holder and bin in each door plus pockets on each front seat backrest. There’s another 12v socket in the rear of the centre console and the centre seat’s backrest folds forward to serve as an armrest with dual cupholders.

The bench seat’s base cushion is fixed, so unlike numerous rivals it can’t swing up and be stored vertically if more internal carrying space is required.

The fifth generation Navara, which is available only in 4x4 dual-cab ute configuration, comes in four model grades comprising SL ($53,348 plus on-road costs), ST ($56,765), ST-X ($63,177) and Pro-4X ($68,418) designed to cater for commercial applications through to lifestyle/recreational use.

Our test vehicle is the entry-level SL with its list pricing in the same ballpark as workhorse equivalents from major players including the Ford Ranger XL 2.0L auto ($51,130), closely related Triton GLX 2.4L auto ($51,640), Isuzu D-Max SX 2.2L auto ($52,200) and Toyota HiLux Workmate 2.0L auto ($53,990).

Like its Navara siblings it's available only with a 2.4-litre bi-turbo four-cylinder diesel engine and six-speed automatic transmission. 

The SL's work-focused standard features include 17-inch steel wheels with 265/65R17 all-terrain tyres and a full-size spare wheel, LED headlights/daytime running lights/tail-lights, tailgate assist, 360-degree camera and front/rear parking sensors to name a few.

The interior is also designed with hard work in mind with its wipe-clean vinyl floor and black fabric trim but there’s also creature comforts like remote keyless entry, single-zone climate control, second-row air vents, power-adjustable lumbar support for the driver’s seat, multi-function steering wheel controls and more.

There’s also multiple USB ports and 12v sockets, a 7.0-inch instrument cluster display and a 9.0-inch touchscreen to control the four-speaker multimedia system which includes wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto connectivity and DAB+ digital radio.

While the V6 turbo-diesel remains unchanged with its 184kW and mighty 600Nm of torque. It remains paired with the 10-speed automatic transmission and the availability of a '4-Auto' setting for the drive system which allows for the use of all-wheel drive on dry bitumen.

The big change to the V6’s status is that it’s now available across the entire dual-cab 4X4 range, right down to the XL version with its rubber floor mats and steel wheels.

Now, if you were cynical, you might suggest Ford has made the V6 more widely available, because the four-cylinder engine option (once the only one available on lesser versions like the XL) has lost a bit of mojo in the transition to Ranger 2026.5.

The thought of a carmaker going backwards on specification and output for an engine goes against the grain somewhat, but in this case, the move to a simpler, potentially more robust engine design makes some sense in the context of long-term ownership costs.

Opinions are divided on how many of the previous 2.0-litre engines posed problems for their buyers, but the fact remains that the wet timing belt (where the rubber belt runs in an oil bath) design had a less-than-perfect track record here and abroad. And even if failures were only a small percentage of units sold, when that failure happens to you, it’s a 100 per cent failure rate…

So, Ford has re-engineered the 2.0-litre unit to use an utterly conventional timing chain, designed new pistons, a different fuel-injection system and reduced the turbocharger count from two to one. The theory is the more robust timing chain will reduce problems, while the single-turbo installation will save money at a production level. In the process, however, both power and torque outputs have fallen. In this case, the bi-turbo engine’s 154kW and 500Nm have fallen to 125kW and 405Nm respectively in the new engine.

Payloads and towing capacity have not been affected (the Ranger can still tow 3500kg) but there’s speculation that 125kW won’t drag a huge trailer around with the same ease as the old engine, even with the 10-speed automatic that’s fitted. Hence the V6 being made available across the board. Allegedly.

The counterpoint is that Ford has dropped the final-dive ratio of the 2.0-litre Rangers which should help with in-gear flexibility and acceleration.

The 2.0-litre-engined Rangers also lack the 4-Auto setting and operate in two-wheel drive mode exclusively on bitumen.

The Navara’s 2.4-litre four-cylinder ‘bi-turbo’ diesel engine is equipped with two turbochargers which work in sequence to boost efficiency, with the smaller one providing fast response at low rpm and the larger one optimising response at higher rpm.

It produces 150kW of power at 3500rpm and its sizeable 470Nm of torque is served at full strength between 1500-2750rpm. It’s also Euro 6B emissions compliant using AdBlue.

This is paired with a six-speed torque converter automatic, offering the choice of sequential manual shifting which can be preferable when hauling and/or towing heavy loads particularly in hilly terrain.

The 4x4 system is dual-range, part-time offering 2H (2WD High Range), 4H (4WD High Range) and 4L (4WD Low Range) selected by a dial on the centre console, where you’ll also find a button to engage the locking rear diff.

The most significant differences between the Triton and Navara are in suspension design and tuning, with the D27 Navara replacing the previous D23 generation’s coil-spring rear end with the Triton’s more traditional leaf-spring arrangement.

Nissan has also collaborated with Melbourne-based engineering partner Premcar in developing three unique suspension tuning packages focused on damper (aka shock absorber) refinement, aimed at enhanced steering response, handling stability and ride comfort.

The premium Pro-4X and mid-grade ST-X each have unique settings while the work-focused SL and ST share the same calibration designed for hauling loads, including heavy-duty four-leaf rear suspension. All model grades also feature electric power steering.

Ford claims a combined cycle (urban/extra-urban) fuel economy figure of 6.8 litres per 100km for the new 2.0-litre engine. We didn’t get too close to that, but that’s hardly surprising given real-world figures almost never match the official test figure. Rather, we managed 8.2L/100km in mainly relaxed country driving and about 9.5L/100km with a little peak hour traffic thrown into the mix. Either way, the Ranger should be pretty frugal.

The real question mark crops up when you hook a bobcat and tandem trailer to the tow-bar. We’ll have to wait and see how that affects economy on the 'little' Ranger engine.

Meantime, those real-world figures, combined with the Ford’s 80-litre fuel tank, mean a typical range of something like 800 to 900km between visits to the service-station.

And while you might be thinking a newly-developed, modern turbo-diesel would need AdBlue, the 2.0-litre as fitted to the Ranger line-up does not.

Nissan claims combined average consumption of 7.7L/100km but the dash display was showing 9.4 at the completion of our 496km test, which included our usual mix of suburban, city and highway driving of which about one third was hauling a near maximum payload.

Our own consumption figure, based on fuel bowser and tripmeter readings, came in slightly lower at 9.1L/100km which is comfortably within the usual 2-3L/100km discrepancy between manufacturer claims and real-world consumption and excellent economy from mostly metro driving.

So, based on our test results, we estimate the Navara SL has a real-world driving range of more than 800km from its 75-litre tank.

Since Ford has made no changes to suspension, steering, tyre specifications or braking hardware, it’s no surprise to find that the new version feels very familiar.

The V6 variants remain something of a revelation after some of the competitors’ four-cylinder engines, and the sophistication and refinement comes through immediately with the V6 slurring away at its upshifts and generally feeling like a high-end solution to a dual-cab propulsion problem.

But of course, we knew that, didn’t we? Exactly, so the big questions surround the new 2.0-litre four-cylinder turbo-diesel with its new specification and downgraded outputs. Specifically, can 125kW and 405Nm cut it in this cut-throat market?

The initial answer appears to be yes. In fact, when you consider that not every dual-cab owner tows three-and-a-half tonnes with one, you can see why a smaller, more frugal engine might do the job. And there’s always the optional V6 if the job demands it, right?

Acceleration is nothing like the V6’s of course, but the new four-cylinder rolls along at highway speeds without a problem and can still accelerate to overtake. That’s largely a function of having 10 gears and a lower final-drive ratio, but the latter doesn’t seem to have made the engine feel manic or short-geared in any way.

Normal overtaking ranges, say, 70km/h to 100km/h feature lots of mid-range and it’s only when you wring the new engine out that it starts to feel a little puny at the top end. But it never fails to impress with its refined feel and fairly low noise levels and, if nothing else, it proves that smaller capacity four-cylinder engines have an inherent advantage in being smoother and silkier to rev than some of the big bangers out there.

Perhaps if you jumped straight from the outgoing bi-turbo variant into the new single-turbo Ranger, you might notice a decent fall-off in performance, but if you’d never driven a bi-turbo, you’ll never dismiss the new engine as anything other than completely adequate.

The caveat to all that is when we get to hitch a big load to the new Ranger and see what a couple or three tonnes does to that apparent adequacy.

Large handles on the A pillars assist climbing aboard into a comfortable and spacious driving position, enhanced by steering wheel and seat adjustments (including power lumbar support) plus a left footrest, which ideally could be a tad wider.

The claimed ride and handling changes resulting from Premcar’s suspension tuning are so seamless they would be hard for most Navara drivers to define. All that matters is how it feels behind the wheel.

And I must say it’s a nice thing to drive, which is consistent with all the Premcar-enhanced D23 Navaras we've tested before it, combining excellent steering feel with supple yet responsive ride and handling whether unladen or loaded.

The switch to electric power steering also provides a noticeably light turning effort when parking which becomes increasingly firm with a stronger self-centering effect at highway speeds, like all variable-ratio systems should.

The six-speed auto’s gearing optimises performance in urban use by keeping the engine operating within its peak torque band most of the time, which ensures a consistently energetic response. It’s also a relaxed highway cruiser, requiring less than 2000rpm to maintain 110km/h where low noise levels allow conversations without raised voices.

To test its GVM rating we forklifted 650kg into the load tub, which combined with our crew of two equalled a total payload of 830kg that was still more than 200kg below its legal limit. The heavy-duty rear springs only compressed about 30mm under this loading, which ensured ample bump-stop clearance and no bottoming out on our test route.

Its handling remained surefooted and predictable when hauling this payload, which, combined with the Navara’s hearty 470Nm, ensured it made light work of our 13 per cent gradient, 2.0km long set climb. It also provided strong engine braking on the way down, so overall it proved to be a competent load hauler.

The only negative from a driver’s perspective is the Navara’s inheritance of the Triton’s annoying driver distraction monitor, which even beeped and prompted me to ‘please look forward’ when I dared to look at the central and passenger door mirrors when overtaking another vehicle. Seriously? It’s ironic that a driver distraction monitor can be distracting, but it is.

The Navara has a five-star ANCAP rating (tested 2024), and comes with eight airbags, auto emergency braking (AEB) with pedestrian and cyclist detection and junction assist, front and rear cross-traffic alert, traffic sign recognition, adaptive cruise control, lane-keeping, front and rear parking sensors, 360-degree/reversing cameras, trailer stability assist and lots more.

The rear seat has ISOFIX child-seat anchorages on the two outer seating positions and three top-tethers.

Ford’s standard factory warranty for the Ranger is five years/unlimited kilometres.

There’s also the option of pre-paid servicing, available when you purchase the vehicle brand-new. By locking in the servicing cost, you can pay for the first four scheduled services up to 60,000km or four years, whichever comes first. That’s worked out in accordance with the vehicle’s 12 month/15,000km service intervals.

The Ford Australia website also has a service-cost calculator function where you can input your vehicle’s details and a fixed-price service cost will be worked out for you.

Ford Australia also has a huge dealer network, so parts and servicing should not represent a problem anywhere in the country.

The Nissan Navara comes standard with a five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty but up to 10 years/300,000km with matching roadside assist is available if the car is serviced at Nissan dealers.

Scheduled servicing is every 12 months/15,000km with capped pricing applicable for the first five scheduled services totalling $2495, or an average of $499 which is competitive with numerous well established rivals.

Nissan Australia has a large network of around 180-200 dealers which includes every state and territory.