Ford Ranger vs Mitsubishi Triton
Spec diff in Australia. No opinion. Just numbers.
Key differences
- • Ford Ranger is 50 mm longer than Mitsubishi Triton.
- • Ford Ranger is 86 kg heavier than Mitsubishi Triton.
- • Ford Ranger uses 0.5 L/100km less fuel than Mitsubishi Triton.
At a glance
Ford RangerMitsubishi Triton
Length
Ford Ranger5370 mm
Mitsubishi Triton5320 mm
Kerb weight
Ford Ranger2250 kg
Mitsubishi Triton2164 kg
Towing (braked)
Ford Ranger3500 kg
Mitsubishi Triton3500 kg
| Spec | Ford Ranger | Mitsubishi Triton |
|---|---|---|
| Length | 5370 mm | 5320 mm✓ |
| Width (excl. mirrors) | 1918 mm✓ | 1930 mm |
| Height | 1884 mm | 1795 mm |
| Wheelbase | 3270 mm | 3130 mm |
| Ground clearance | 234 mm | 228 mm |
| Turning circle | 12.9 m | — |
| Kerb weight | 2250 kg | 2164 kg✓ |
| Payload | 980 kg | 1036 kg✓ |
| Towing (braked) | 3500 kg | 3500 kg |
| Towing (unbraked) | 750 kg | 750 kg |
| Seating capacity | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel economy (combined) | 7.2 L/100km✓ | 7.7 L/100km |
| Fuel tank | 80 L✓ | 75 L |
✓ marks the trim with the conventional better number for that spec — smaller for length, width, weight, fuel use, turning circle and DC 10–80% time; larger for range, cargo, payload, towing, battery and charging speed. Rows like height, wheelbase, ground clearance and seating capacity are shown without a ✓ because the "better" direction depends on your use case (headroom vs garage fit, off-road clearance vs car-park access).