Ford Ranger vs Peugeot Partner

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.

It might not be the most modern looking or feeling small van, but amongst its competitors, the Partner stands out for its relative value and load-lugging capabilities.

It’s somewhat fun to drive but now feels a bit plain on the inside, and could benefit from a few extra options and features to make it more comfortable and maybe even a little more customisable.

Still, I think the Peugeot Partner will fit the needs of many primarily city-based small businesses or tradies who want to work out of a compact and easy-to-drive van instead of an unwieldy and often overkill dual-cab ute.

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.

The Partner’s recent update brings with it a new, more contemporary face, with the ‘claw’ style light fittings clasping a body-coloured panel in place of the usual grille fitting. It also updates all the badgework to match the French brand’s passenger car range.

Thanks to these upgrades, as well as the fetching colour and Premium body-matching highlights, it looks pretty schmick at a distance, but up close you can start to tell the Partner’s relative age.

It simply doesn’t look as contemporary or coherent in its design as the much newer ground-up fifth-generation Caddy or third-generation Renault Kangoo with which it competes.

A big part of this is due to the Partner being based on a much older platform which is shared across a lot of Stellantis brands. It started life as the third-generation Citroen Berlingo in 2018, and needs to warp its look overseas to fit the Fiat Doblo, Toyota Proace and Vauxhall Combo (although the Partner is the only version sold in Australia).

As a result, up close you can see its somewhat pieced together brand identity bits and boxy, upright bodywork.

There are some odd touches, like the plastic bumper at the front not matching the gloss black highlights or body coloured bumper at the rear, and the contemporary badgework finished in a matt grey adds yet another texture and colour to the mix.

The theme continues inside, with a huge plastic dash piece jutting into the cabin space. Here, the bits from Peugeot’s passenger car range have been integrated, including the cool 'squircle' steering wheel, digital dash elements and the multimedia screen.

In the centre, the electric shifter part from cars like the current 2008 small SUV has been embedded in the sea of plastic.

It technically matches the brand identity, but it doesn't stop the Partner’s interior from feeling a bit cobbled together, rather than the more unified corporate identity which is so well executed in the VW Caddy, which is almost hard to tell apart from a Golf.

The software is another area the Partner could use some work. It’s fairly simple and straightforward to use, but the layout isn’t very customizable, both for the multimedia suite and digital dash.

Again, the Caddy runs rings around Peugeot in this department, with its more impressively-featured and nicer-looking software it shares with other VW Group passenger cars.

There are also little areas which feel like they’re behind the pace for a top-spec variant. The steering wheel is hard plastic without even the option for a softer wrap, for example, and the Caddy offers an alternate optional synthetic leather seat trim for an operator willing to dish out a little extra cash.

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.

So design-wise the Partner might barely hit the brief when it comes to matching it up with Peugeot passenger car design, but one area where it manages to shine is in-cabin storage.

There’s lots on offer, massive bottle holders and pockets in the doors, storage areas galore in the big plastic dash, with trays in the centre and passenger side, as well as behind the multimedia screen and under the shifter.

There are a set of non-variable bottle holders cut out of the top of the dash, as well as hidden storage compartments under both front passenger seats.

I should mention at this point the Partner has a three-across front bench, although actually putting three people in there will be quite the squeeze, especially given the centre of the dash juts quite far into the cabin area, leaving the centre occupant with nowhere to put their knees.

Maybe it will suit a child in a pinch if you plan to have this as a small business vehicle which may need to be dual-purpose from time to time.

There’s also a fold-down rotating table thing in the backrest of the centre position, designed to be used with a laptop. Another feature of the Partner’s dash is physical toggles and buttons for the climate controls, which are increasingly rare in favour of touch-based menus.

In terms of load area dimensions, the Partner LWB offers 3.9 cubic metres (excluding the bulkhead) and dimensions come in at 2167mm long, 1527mm wide (1229 between the arches) and 1243mm tall. This should accommodate two Euro-sized palettes.

Loading and securing should also be relatively breezy thanks to sliding doors on both sides, a barn door rear which hinges out of the way for forklift loading, and no less than 10 tie down rings.

It also scores decent LED lighting in the roof, so you can see what you’re doing in a poorly lit warehouse, or when using the load area at night.

As for capacities, the Partner LWB has a payload of 898kg. It claims a 950kg braked towing capacity (not much more than the unbraked of 740kg) although in reality 740 seems to be closer to the limit thanks to the 74kg towball download rating.

How does this compare to the Caddy? I was surprised to find the Caddy 5 in equivalent LWB form has a smaller load area (3.7 cubic metres) and a significantly lower payload of 695kg.

However, it can tow slightly more (up to a claimed 1500kg - however has a 75kg max towball download). Additionally, the Partner isn’t able to be fitted with a tailgate to replace the barn doors (an option which some buyers may prefer on the Caddy).

A full size spare wheel is present on all variants to keep you on the road.

Given the uniquely European nature of a van like this, it makes sense the remaining options offered to us are only from French and German makers.

In fact, this Peugeot Partner is one of just three left for you to choose from. Starting from $39,990, before on-roads (for a Pro SWB), the Partner goes into battle against its Gallic nemesis, the Renault Kangoo, and the defending small van champion in the form of VW’s popular fifth-generation Caddy.

Unlike its rivals, though, the Partner range is automatic only and exclusively powered by a three-cylinder, turbo-petrol engine (if you exclude the electric ePartner).

This immediately gives it a leg up, as in its most affordable form, it already undercuts the base manual Caddy (TSI220 SWB - $40,990) and most affordable automatic Kangoo (SWB auto - $41,990) although the Renault holds onto the most affordable price-tag in the segment if you’re happy shifting yourself, at $38,990 for its SWB manual.

The specific version we’re looking at for this review is the Premium LWB, which wears a price-tag of $45,990 and adds an additional 350mm to its length over the SWB.

Standard kit on Premium versions includes items otherwise missing on the Pro, like 16-inch alloy wheels instead of steel wheels, LED headlights instead of halogen, push-start ignition instead of turn-key, dual-zone climate instead of single-zone as well as body-coloured highlights, rails and door handles in place of plain plastic fittings.

Standard items across the range include a 10-inch central touchscreen with wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, a digital instrument cluster, cloth seat trim, a 180-degree reversing camera, a digital rear vision mirror to make up for the standard windowless barn doors, a glaze-finish bulkhead to separate the cabin and load area, as well as an array of active safety items we’ll explore later.

The fetching blue scheme our car was painted in comes at an additional $690, and from there you can modify further with an array of factory options.

Key among them are a choice of windows for each sliding door ($486 each) or the barn door ($503), a metal cargo barrier to protect the bulkhead ($1146), an LED cargo light kit ($350), roof racks ($536) or a more comprehensive roof kit ($2610).

Additionally, long-wheelbase versions can be equipped with a cargo bay floor kit ($894), wall protection kit ($960) or the rubber floor mat which our van had ($600).

A complete towing set-up will set you back $1045 for the towbar and $510 for the wiring harness.

From a base of nearly $50K then, you can easily add a few thousand to the price once you start ticking boxes, but it is important to note not every commercial van, even ones a size up, offer this level of factory customisation.

This gives the Partner deeper (and warranty-covered) customisation for various trade purposes straight from the factory.

For what it’s worth, I matched our test car in the configurator and ended up with a final price of $52,429 with drive-away pricing set to Sydney.

Out of curiosity, I also priced up a VW Caddy Cargo LWB petrol auto with as close as I could get to the same equipment as this Partner Premium, and was surprised to find I had to tick a lot more option boxes to get LED headlights, alloy wheels (although the Caddy alloys are larger at 17-inches), premium paint, colour matching body panels, keyless entry with push-start and a rubber floor mat.

The total price for the spec-matching Caddy came in at $57,952 drive-away in Sydney.

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.

There is just one combustion engine option in the Partner range, a three-cylinder 1.2-litre turbocharged petrol unit producing 96kW/230Nm which drives the front wheels via an eight-speed automatic transmission.

The only alternative to this is the E-Partner which sports a 100kW/260Nm electric motor instead.

The three-cylinder petrol is a perky unit sourced from Peugeot’s passenger car line-up, although the Partner range doesn’t quite offer the VW Caddy’s breadth of options; the choice of a 1.5-litre four-cylinder petrol or a 2.0-litre diesel in two states of tune.

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.

One of the key downsides of the Peugeot’s Euro-compliant turbo-petrol engine is it requires mid-shelf 95RON fuel, which could be a blow to those who want to drill down on running costs.

Claimed fuel consumption on the official combined (urban/extra-urban) cycle is decent, at 6.3L/100km. Ours spent the week mainly urban commuting and landed closer to the official urban number of 7.3L/100km with a total of 7.2L/100km over a few hundred kilometres.

The 60-litre fuel tank should allow for roughly 950km of driving range at the official consumption. More like 830km using our test figure.

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.

One thing which I always like about these little European vans for trades is they’re usually very humane and easy to drive compared to a dual-cab or a van in a larger market segment.

They tend to offer closer to the feel of a passenger car, with some of the little luxuries which are missing in big hollow diesel units like some form of refinement and less noise.

The Partner is no different, and shone in some ways I did not expect.

The brand has done a good job of making it feel like a Peugeot passenger car from a touch-point perspective with the dash elements and the small chuckable steering wheel.

It also has a swift steering ratio, making even this LWB version feel nimble and agile for darting around corners and down tight laneways just as I’m sure its French creators envisaged.

The peppy three-cylinder engine helps the hatch-like feel. It offers a punchy turbo surge and a satisfyingly gruff soundtrack, which makes this little commercial offering quite fun to drive.

The ride is also remarkably smooth for a commercial vehicle, even completely unladen. Car-like suspension handles the bumps and potholes of the city environment well, which could make this a good choice for delivery drivers who will spend a lot of time in urban environments, and maybe are less concerned about getting so close to the GCM rating.

However, it’s not quite as polished as the Caddy, which won me over big time when the fifth generation version arrived in 2022.

The Peugeot can suffer from significant bouts of turbo lag, and its eight-speed transmission can be occasionally jerky from a stand-still, making for the odd awkward moment at T-junctions and roundabouts where this van takes a second to get going again. 

Additionally, some of the fun, refined feeling wears away over time as you constantly come into contact with the hard plastic trims of the interior, and the scratchy urethane steering wheel.

This can get a bit jarring over a full day of driving. It’s for this reason VW puts a leather-bound steering wheel in even basic versions of the Caddy these days.

The software also leaves a lot to be desired, with minimal customisation and laggy interfaces.

Sure, the reality is you’ll spend most of your time working with Apple CarPlay or Android Auto which worked perfectly in my time with the car, but it would be nice to have more customisation for the dash and a few nicer menus for the multimedia screen.

All in all, then, it’s a nice little van to drive, and is excellent at urban duties, but it has a slightly industrial character which will eventually catch up with you after a long day behind the wheel.

The Caddy is better in pretty much every way behind the wheel, but then it also costs over $5000 more in equivalent spec and can't carry as much stuff.

The Partner is covered by a par-for-the-course five year and 200,000km warranty which applies to the rest of its light commercial range, paired with five years of roadside assistance. 

The Partner requires servicing once every 12 months or 15,000km.

When it comes to pricing, you can package the car up with either a two- or four-year service plan (priced at $400 or $1000, respectively) which Peugeot claims can save you up to $437 compared to a-la-carte servicing.