Colorado vs Ranger
Two makers, one class, one decision: the Colorado from Chevrolet or the Ranger from Ford. The choice here comes down to priorities: engine & performance favors the Colorado, while fuel economy & range favors the Ranger.
At a glance
- Engine & Performance Colorado wins
- Fuel Economy & Range Ranger wins
- Space & Practicality Tie
- Off-road & Towing Tie
- Safety & Tech Tie
- Price Colorado wins
- Engine & Performance10.0
- Fuel Economy & Range0.7
- Off-road & Towing10.0
- Engine & Performance4.5
- Fuel Economy & Range10.0
- Off-road & Towing9.7
Spec scores (0 to 10) are calculated from manufacturer specs against other models in the same class. See how the formula works. They are not reviews or user ratings.
Key Differences
-
The Ranger has better fuel economy
A clear win for the Ranger: 23 mpg against 20 mpg. Few specs in this matchup are as one-sided. Better combined fuel economy lowers your running costs every week, and the savings add up over years of ownership.
-
The Colorado has 120 lb-ft more torque
Here the Colorado pulls well ahead of the Ranger, with 430 lb-ft compared to 310 lb-ft. More torque means stronger pulling from low speeds, which you feel when accelerating from a stop or climbing grades.
-
The Colorado has 40 hp more power
Small gaps can still matter over time, and here the Colorado leads 310 hp to 270 hp. Power is only part of the story; weight, gearing and torque delivery shape how quick a car feels.
-
The Colorado has
Numbers like 21 gal against 18 gal only tell you which is larger (here, the Colorado), not which is better. A bigger fuel tank means fewer stops on long trips, though the real range also depends on fuel economy.
-
The Ranger has better highway fuel economy
The difference is minor (26 mpg against 23 mpg), but if you’re splitting hairs, the Ranger wins it. Highway fuel economy matters if you cover long distances at steady speeds.
Design & Size
If you’re worried about fit, relax: either car occupies roughly the same footprint.
Dimensions
| Spec | Colorado | Ranger |
|---|---|---|
| Length | 213.2 in | 210.8 in |
| Width (no mirrors) | 74.9 in | N/A (not specified) |
| Wheelbase | 131.4 in | 128.7 in |
Engine & Performance
Colorado leads
This is one of the Colorado’s strongest areas. On engine & performance, the Ranger falls well short. The Colorado steps ahead thanks to 120 lb-ft more torque. The Colorado’s extra torque makes it more relaxed when fully loaded or towing. If engine & performance is your priority, the Colorado is the car to pick.
Torque
Colorado: 430 lb-ft Ranger: 310 lb-ft Electrified powertrains deliver torque instantly, so compare torque figures alongside the powertrain type.
Total system output
Colorado: 310 hp Ranger: 270 hp The Colorado’s extra output gives it more in reserve when you need to get up to speed.
Fuel Economy & Range
Ranger leads
This section belongs to the Ranger. In fuel economy & range, it leads the Colorado by a margin that’s hard to ignore. The Ranger takes this one with better fuel economy. The Ranger uses less fuel on the standard combined cycle, which matters most if you drive a lot. For fuel economy & range, the Ranger is the one to beat.
Fuel economy (combined)
Colorado: 20 mpg Ranger: 23 mpg Official figures rarely match real-world driving exactly, but the ranking between two cars tends to hold.
Fuel tank
Colorado: 21 gal Ranger: 18 gal Tank size and fuel economy together decide your range, so look at both before drawing conclusions.
Space & Practicality
Too close to call
There’s little to choose between them when it comes to space & practicality. For space & practicality, pick whichever you prefer for other reasons.
Off-road & Towing
Too close to call
Neither pulls ahead on off-road & towing; the numbers are close throughout. In short, off-road & towing is a draw; the decision lies elsewhere.
Safety & Tech
Too close to call
Neither the Colorado nor the Ranger has a real advantage in the safety & tech category. Bottom line for safety & tech: it’s a wash.
Full Specifications
Engine & Performance
| Spec | Colorado | Ranger |
|---|---|---|
| Powertrain | Gas | Gas |
| Engine | 2.7L turbo I4 (TurboMax) | 2.3L turbo I4 (EcoBoost) |
| Total system output | 310 hp (winner) | 270 hp |
| Torque | 430 lb-ft (winner) | 310 lb-ft |
| Transmission | 8-speed automatic | 10-speed automatic |
| Drivetrain | RWD (4WD available) | RWD (4x4 available) |
Fuel Economy & Range
| Spec | Colorado | Ranger |
|---|---|---|
| Fuel economy (combined)EPA estimate where available | 20 mpg | 23 mpg (winner) Most efficient in class |
| Fuel economy (city) | 19 mpg | 21 mpg (winner) Best city economy |
| Fuel economy (highway) | 23 mpg | 26 mpg (winner) Best highway economy |
| Fuel tank | 21 gal | 18 gal |
Space & Practicality
| Spec | Colorado | Ranger |
|---|---|---|
| Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Off-road & Towing
| Spec | Colorado | Ranger |
|---|---|---|
| Max towing | 7,700 lb | 7,500 lb |
| AWD / 4WD available | Yes | Yes |
Safety & Tech
| Spec | Colorado | Ranger |
|---|---|---|
| Largest touchscreen | 11.3 in | 12 in |
| Driver-assist suite | Chevy Safety Assist | Ford Co-Pilot360 |
| Basic warranty | 3 yr / 36,000 mi | 3 yr / 36,000 mi |
Dimensions
| Spec | Colorado | Ranger |
|---|---|---|
| Length | 213.2 in | 210.8 in |
| Width (no mirrors) | 74.9 in | N/A (not specified) |
| Wheelbase | 131.4 in | 128.7 in |
Price
| Spec | Colorado | Ranger |
|---|---|---|
| Starting MSRP | $31,900 (winner) Lowest price in class | $33,350 |
“N/A” means the manufacturer does not specify the value or we could not confirm it. Figures marked “manufacturer rating” are the maker’s own claims, not our measurements.
Price & Value
At launch, the difference was a modest $1,450, with the Colorado slightly more affordable. Paying $1,450 more for the Ranger gets you some gains, but it also leaves some areas to the Colorado.
Launch prices (US) as of launch. Discounts and bundles come and go, so compare current prices before buying.
Which One Should You Buy?
Choose the Colorado if…
- you often drive loaded up or with a trailer (430 lb-ft vs 310 lb-ft of torque)
- you merge, overtake or climb hills with a full load (310 hp vs 270 hp)
- you want the lower price and can live with the trade-offs ($1,450 less)
Choose the Ranger if…
- you want better combined fuel economy (23 mpg vs 20 mpg)
- you want better highway fuel economy (26 mpg vs 23 mpg)
- you mostly drive in town (21 mpg vs 19 mpg in the city)
Also Compared
Frequently Asked Questions
Should I buy the Colorado or the Ranger?
The Colorado and the Ranger split the comparison (engine & performance for the Colorado, fuel economy & range for the Ranger), so pick the strength you’ll use.
Which is larger, the Colorado or the Ranger?
They’re practically the same size. The difference between the Colorado and the Ranger is too small to matter.
Is the Colorado cheaper than the Ranger?
The Colorado is the cheaper option, launching at $1,450 less than the Ranger (launch prices as of launch).
Executive Summary
Here’s my honest read on a classic rivalry: Chevrolet’s Colorado against Ford’s Ranger. Here’s what matters most to me: the Colorado offers 120 lb-ft more torque. Credit where it’s due: the Ranger offers better fuel economy.
If your days lean on engine & performance, I’d pick the Colorado; if they lean on fuel economy & range, the Ranger.
My pick: it genuinely depends, with the Colorado ahead on engine & performance and the Ranger ahead on fuel economy & range.
Personal opinion based on the data above. Your priorities may differ.