Compare the2024 Chevrolet ColoradoVS 2023 Ford Ranger

Safety
Warranty
Reliability
Engine
Fuel Economy and Range
Environmental Friendliness
Brakes and Stopping
Tires and Wheels
Suspension and Handling
Chassis
Cargo Capacity
Payload and Towing
Ergonomics
Economic Advantages
Recommendations

Safety

© 1999 - 2024Advanta-STAR Automotive Research, all rights reserved. This vehicle comparison and all of the content in it are provided only by license from Advanta-STAR Automotive Research Corporation of America (“Advanta-STAR”). If you are not a legally licensed user of this vehicle comparison, it is against federal law to access it, copy it, forward it, or use it in any manner whatsoever. Any unauthorized use of this vehicle comparison is a violation of U.S. and international law and is punishable criminally and civilly. Removal of this watermark/notification without prior written license and approval received from Advanta-STAR is an agreement, understanding, and/or stipulation by the person(s), entities, agents, attorneys, and any other persons involved in the removal of this watermark/notification (including but not limited to Search Optics, LLC and any and all parent entities, sister entities, and subsidiary entities of Search Optics, LLC and/or any other entity, agent, attorney, and persons related in any manner to Search Optics, LLC) to: 1) an agreed upon amount of liquidated monetary damages of a minimum of $1,250,000.00 US Dollars in favor of Advanta-STAR; 2) the jurisdiction and enforcement of any legal claims associated with this matter asserted by Advanta-STAR in the United States Federal District Court in Portand, Oregon; and 3) service of process of any legal claims asserted by Advanta-STAR associated with this matter may be accomplished by First-Class Postage by the United States Postal Service or comparable service. XPYNN-M34HG 2a06:98c0:3600::103 2024/11/23

In the past twenty years hundreds of infants and young children have died after being left in vehicles, usually by accident. When turning the vehicle off, drivers of the Colorado are reminded to check the back seat if they opened the rear door before starting out. The Ranger doesn’t offer a back seat reminder.

The Colorado’s standard pretensioning seatbelts also sense rear collisions and remove slack from the front seatbelts to help protect the occupants from whiplash and other injuries. The Ranger doesn’t offer a whiplash protection system.

Full-time four-wheel drive is optional on the Colorado. Full-time four-wheel drive gives added traction for safety in all conditions, not just off-road, like the only system available on the Ranger.

The Colorado’s standard lane departure warning system alerts a temporarily inattentive driver when the vehicle begins to leave its lane and gently nudges the vehicle back towards its lane. A lane departure warning system costs extra on the Ranger.

The Colorado offers an optional Surround Vision to allow the driver to see objects all around the vehicle on a screen. The Ranger only offers a rear monitor and front and rear parking sensors that beep or flash a light. That doesn’t help with obstacles to the sides.

Both the Colorado and Ranger offer rear cross-traffic warning, but the Colorado with Rear Cross Traffic Alert also has Rear Cross Traffic Braking (automatically applies the brakes) to better prevent a collision when backing near traffic. The Ranger’s Cross Traffic Alert doesn’t automatically brake.

Both the Colorado and the Ranger have standard driver and passenger frontal airbags, front side-impact airbags, side-impact head airbags, front seatbelt pretensioners, height adjustable front shoulder belts, plastic fuel tanks, four-wheel antilock brakes, traction control, electronic stability systems to prevent skidding, crash mitigating brakes, daytime running lights, rearview cameras and available blind spot warning systems.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does 35 MPH front crash tests on new vehicles. In this test, results indicate that the Chevrolet Colorado is safer than the Ford Ranger:

	Colorado	Ranger
	Passenger
STARS	4 Stars	4 Stars
HIC	293	344
Neck Injury Risk	34.9%	41%
Neck Stress	178 lbs.	194 lbs.
Neck Compression	92 lbs.	110 lbs.
Leg Forces (l/r)	39/149 lbs.	509/287 lbs.

New test not comparable to pre-2011 test results. More stars = Better. Lower test results = Better.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does side impact tests on new vehicles. In this test, which crashes the vehicle into a flat barrier at 38.5 MPH and into a post at 20 MPH, results indicate that the Chevrolet Colorado is safer than the Ford Ranger:

	Colorado	Ranger
	Rear Seat
STARS	5 Stars	5 Stars
Hip Force	285 lbs.	329 lbs.
	Into Pole
STARS	5 Stars	5 Stars
Spine Acceleration	32 G’s	44 G’s
Hip Force	586 lbs.	683 lbs.

New test not comparable to pre-2011 test results. More stars = Better. Lower test results = Better.

Warranty

The Colorado’s corrosion warranty is 1 year longer than the Ranger’s (6 vs. 5 years).

Reliability

To reliably power the ignition and other systems and to recharge the battery, the Colorado has a standard 170-amp alternator (220-amp - Colorado optional). The Ranger’s 150-amp alternator isn’t as powerful.

To reliably start during all conditions and help handle large electrical loads, the Colorado has a standard 800-amp battery. The Ranger’s 700-amp battery isn’t as powerful.

J.D. Power and Associates’ 2023 Initial Quality Study of new car owners surveyed provide the statistics that show that Chevrolet vehicles are better in initial quality than Ford vehicles. J.D. Power ranks Chevrolet above average in initial quality. With 35 more problems per 100 vehicles, Ford is rated below average.

J.D. Power and Associates’ 2022 survey of the owners of three-year-old vehicles provides the long-term dependability statistics that show that Chevrolet vehicles are more reliable than Ford vehicles. J.D. Power ranks Chevrolet above average in long-term dependability. With 21 more problems per 100 vehicles in the first three years of ownership, Ford is rated lower.

From surveys of all its subscribers, Consumer Reports’ January 2024 Auto Issue reports that Chevrolet vehicles are more reliable than Ford vehicles. Consumer Reports ranks Chevrolet 2 places higher in reliability than Ford.

Engine

The Colorado’s optional 2.7 turbo 4-cylinder produces 40 more horsepower (310 vs. 270) and 120 lbs.-ft. more torque (430 vs. 310) than the Ranger’s 2.3 turbo 4-cylinder.

As tested in Motor Trend the Chevrolet Colorado (310 HP engine) is faster than the Ford Ranger:

	Colorado	Ranger
Zero to 60 MPH	6.9 sec	7 sec

Fuel Economy and Range

An engine control system that can shut down some of the engine’s cylinders helps improve the Colorado’s fuel efficiency. The Ranger doesn’t offer a system that can shut down part of the engine.

To lower fuel costs and make buying fuel easier, the Chevrolet Colorado uses regular unleaded gasoline. The Ranger requires premium for maximum efficiency, which can cost on average about 82.8 cents more per gallon.

The Colorado has 3.4 gallons more fuel capacity than the Ranger (21.4 vs. 18 gallons), for longer range between fill-ups.

Environmental Friendliness

In its Green Vehicle Guide, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rates the Chevrolet Colorado higher (7 out of 10) than the Ford Ranger (3 to 5). This means the Colorado produces up to 24.5 pounds less smog-producing pollutants than the Ranger every 15,000 miles.

Brakes and Stopping

For better stopping power the Colorado’s brake rotors are larger than those on the Ranger:

	Colorado	Ranger
Front Rotors	13.4 inches	12.2 inches
Rear Rotors	13.3 inches	12.1 inches

In an emergency stopping situation, many drivers don’t press the brakes with enough force to stop the vehicle in the shortest distance. The Colorado has standard Brake Assist to detect emergency braking situations (by how hard and how quickly the brake pedal is pressed) and then automatically apply maximum braking immediately in order to help prevent a collision. The Ranger doesn’t offer a brake assist feature.

The Colorado stops much shorter than the Ranger:

	Colorado	Ranger
60 to 0 MPH	121 feet	140 feet	Motor Trend

Tires and Wheels

For better traction, the Colorado ZR2 Bison’s tires are larger than the largest tires available on the Ranger (315/70R17 vs. 265/65R17).

The Colorado Trail Boss’ optional tires provide better handling because they have a lower 50 series profile (height to width ratio) that provides a stiffer sidewall than the Ranger’s optional 60 series tires.

For better ride, handling and brake cooling the Colorado has standard 17-inch wheels. Smaller 16-inch wheels are standard on the Ranger. The Colorado Trail Boss’ optional 22-inch wheels are larger than the 18-inch wheels optional on the Ranger.

The Colorado has a standard easy tire fill system. When inflating the tires, the vehicle’s integrated tire pressure sensors keep track of the pressure as the tires fill and tell the driver when the tires are inflated to the proper pressure. The Ranger doesn’t offer vehicle monitored tire inflation.

Suspension and Handling

For a smoother ride and more stable handling, the Colorado’s wheelbase is 4.6 inches longer than on the Ranger (131.4 inches vs. 126.8 inches).

For better handling and stability, the average track (width between the wheels) on the Colorado is 2.6 inches wider in the front and 2.6 inches wider in the rear than the average track on the Ranger.

The Colorado’s front to rear weight distribution is more even (56% to 44%) than the Ranger’s (57.3% to 42.7%). This gives the Colorado more stable handling and braking.

The Colorado LT 4x4 handles at .78 G’s, while the Ranger Lariat SuperCrew 4x4 pulls only .71 G’s of cornering force in a Motor Trend skidpad test.

The Colorado Trail Boss executes Motor Trend’s “Figure Eight” maneuver 1.4 seconds quicker than the Ranger Lariat SuperCrew 4x4 (27.7 seconds @ .63 average G’s vs. 29.1 seconds @ .56 average G’s).

For greater off-road capability the Colorado ZR2 has a greater minimum ground clearance than the Ranger SuperCrew Tremor (10.7 vs. 9.7 inches), allowing the Colorado to travel over rougher terrain without being stopped or damaged.

Chassis

The front grille of the Colorado uses electronically controlled shutters to close off airflow and reduce drag when less engine cooling is needed. This helps improve highway fuel economy. The Ranger doesn’t offer active grille shutters.

Cargo Capacity

The Colorado’s cargo box is larger than the Ranger’s in almost every dimension:

	Colorado	Ranger SuperCrew	Ranger SuperCab
Length (short/long)	61.7”	61”	72.8”
Max Width	58.8”	61.4”	61.4”
Min Width	45.5”	44.8”	44.8”

The Chevrolet Colorado offers an optional EZ-Lift and Lower, which prevents the heavy tailgate from falling with a crash and causing injury. It allows adults and children to easily open and close the tailgate with one hand to better facilitate loading and unloading. The Ford Ranger doesn’t offer a tailgate assist.

The Chevrolet Colorado has a standard CornerStep, which allows for much easier access to the cargo area. The Ford Ranger doesn’t offer a rear cargo step.

The Colorado has bed indentations that accommodate 2x4s for two-tiered loading to help accommodate diverse loads; the Ranger doesn’t offer two-tiered loading.

The Colorado has stake postholes, to allow the containment of tall, light loads. The Ranger doesn’t offer stake postholes.

Payload and Towing

Maximum trailer towing in the Ford Ranger is limited to 7500 pounds. The Colorado offers up to a 7700 lbs. towing capacity.

The Colorado 4x4 has a higher optional payload capacity than the Ranger SuperCrew 4x4 (1710 vs. 1609 lbs.).

Ergonomics

When two different drivers share the Colorado Z71/ZR2, the optional memory seats and mirrors make it convenient for both. Each setting activates different, customized memories for the driver’s seat position and outside mirror angle. The Ranger doesn’t offer a memory system.

The Colorado Z71/ZR2’s optional easy entry system glides the driver’s seat back when the door is unlocked or the ignition is switched off, making it easier for the driver to get in and out. The Ranger doesn’t offer an easy entry system.

The Colorado’s instruments include an oil pressure gauge and a temperature gauge - which could save your engine! Often ‘idiot lights’ don’t warn you until damage has been done. The Ranger does not have an oil pressure gauge.

The Colorado’s power parking brake sets with one touch and releases with one touch or automatically. The Ranger has a lever-type parking brake that has to be strenuously raised to engage properly. It has to be lifted up more and a button depressed to release it.

The power windows standard on both the Colorado and the Ranger have locks to prevent small children from operating them. When the lock on the Colorado is engaged the driver can still operate all of the windows, for instance to close one opened by a child. The Ranger prevents the driver from operating the rear windows just as it does the other passengers.

The Colorado’s standard front and rear power windows all lower with one touch of the switches, making it more convenient at drive-up windows and toll booths, or when talking with someone outside of the car. The Ranger’s passenger windows don’t open automatically.

On a hot day the Colorado’s driver can lower all the windows from a distance using the keyless remote. The driver of the Ranger can only operate the windows from inside the vehicle, with the ignition on.

The Colorado has standard power remote mirrors. The Ranger only comes with remote mirrors at extra cost. Without them the driver will have to roll down the windows and reach across the car to adjust the mirrors.

The Colorado’s power mirror controls are mounted on the armrest for easy access. The Ranger’s optional power mirror controls are on the dash where they are possibly hidden by the steering wheel and are awkward to manipulate.

Optional air-conditioned seats in the Colorado Z71/ZR2 keep the driver and front passenger comfortable and take the sting out of hot seats in Summer. The Ranger doesn’t offer air-conditioned seats.

On extremely cold winter days, the Colorado LT/Z71/ZR2’s optional heated steering wheel provides comfort, allowing the driver to steer safely and comfortably before the vehicle heater warms up. The Ranger doesn’t offer a heated steering wheel.

Both the Colorado and the Ranger offer rear vents. For greater rear passenger comfort, the Colorado offers optional rear air conditioning vents to keep rear occupants cool in summer or warm in winter. The Ranger doesn’t offer rear air conditioning vents, only heat vents.

Bluetooth wireless connectivity is standard on the Colorado, connecting the driver and passenger’s cell phones to the vehicle systems. This allows them to use the vehicle’s stereo and hand controls to place calls safely and easily. Bluetooth costs extra on the Ranger.

To quickly and conveniently keep personal devices charged without cables tangling and wearing out, the Chevrolet Colorado (except WT/Trail Boss) offers an optional wireless phone charging system (Qi) in the center console. The Ranger doesn’t offer wireless personal charging.

Economic Advantages

Insurance will cost less for the Colorado owner. The Complete Car Cost Guide estimates that insurance for the Colorado will cost $430 less than the Ranger over a five-year period.

Recommendations

Motor Trend selected the Colorado as their 2024 Truck of the Year. The Ranger has never been chosen.

The Chevrolet Colorado outsold the Ford Ranger by 56% during 2022.