CS
CarSorted
HomeComparisonsFord Ranger vs RAM 1500
Spec Battle Updated 20 April 2026 5 min read

Ford Ranger vs RAM 1500

A detailed look at how two of Australia's most popular Utes compare on price, running costs, safety, and everyday livability.

Specifications and pricing correct at time of publishing. Prices are RRP before on-road costs unless stated otherwise. Always confirm with the manufacturer or dealer before purchasing.

SpecFordRAM
Price (RRP)$37,130$119,950
Fuel typeDieselPetrol
Power125kW291kW
0-100 km/h10.5s7.5s
Fuel Economy6.9 L/100km13.1 L/100km
Boot Space900L
Towing3,500kg4,500kg
Warranty5yr / Unlimited3yr / 100k km
ANCAP Safety5 StarsNo data

Track the Ford Ranger & RAM 1500

Get price-drop alerts on these models plus our free weekly new-car rundown. Unsubscribe anytime.

Price Breakdown

The Ford Ranger starts from $37,130 before on-road costs, while the RAM 1500 opens at $119,950. That makes the Ford Ranger the more affordable entry point by $82,820.

Once you factor in stamp duty, registration, CTP insurance, and dealer delivery, expect to add roughly 8-12% on top of the RRP depending on your state. That puts estimated driveaway prices in the ballpark of $40,843 and $131,945 respectively.

Over 5 years, the running costs favour the Ford Ranger by roughly $8,835 in fuel alone.

Safety Rundown

ANCAP safety ratings have not been published for both models yet. We will update this section when crash test results are available.

Feature Showdown

The Ford Ranger features a 12-inch touchscreen paired with a 8-inch digital dash, while the RAM 1500 gets a 8.4-inch display and 7-inch instruments. Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are standard across both.

The RAM 1500 counters with heated front seats and power tailgate that the Ford Ranger does not offer. Which feature set matters more depends on your daily routine and priorities.

Drivetrain

The Ford Ranger uses a Diesel Turbo producing 125kW and 405Nm of torque, sent through a automatic to a RWD layout. It covers the 0-100km/h sprint in 10.5 seconds.

The RAM 1500 responds with a Petrol V8 making 291kW and 556Nm, paired to a automatic driving all four wheels. It gets to 100km/h in 7.5 seconds.

The RAM 1500 has the clear power advantage at 291kW vs 125kW. In the real-world sprint, the RAM 1500 is 3.0s quicker. For most buyers, the way each car feels day-to-day matters more than outright acceleration.

Space & Comfort

The Ford Ranger measures 5,225mm long on a 3,270mm wheelbase, 691mm shorter than the RAM 1500 at 5,916mm (3,672mm wheelbase). The longer wheelbase on the RAM 1500 generally means more rear legroom.

0

For towing, the RAM 1500 leads with a 4,500kg braked capacity vs 3,500kg. That 1,000kg difference matters if you regularly hitch up.

Turning Circle

Kerb-to-kerb diameter. Smaller turns easier in tight carparks and U-turns.

12.9m to 14.4m

TightestFord Ranger XL 4x2 Hi-Rider Single Cab Cab-ChassisTightest turn at 12.9m, easiest U-turns and carparks
Ford Ranger XL 4x2 Hi-Rider Single Cab Cab-Chassis
12.9mTighter
Best
RAM 1500 Big Horn V8
14.4m
Worst
Ford Ranger XL 4x2 Hi-Rider Single Cab Cab-Chassis
12.9m · Large

Based on 12.9m turning circle:

  • U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
  • Standard parking bay
  • Tight carparks
  • Narrow laneways
RAM 1500 Big Horn V8
14.4m · Large

Based on 14.4m turning circle:

  • U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
  • Standard parking bay
  • Tight carparks
  • Narrow laneways

Turning circle ratings

Under 10m, Excellent
10 to 11m, Good
11 to 12m, Average
Over 12m, Large
Compare U-turns side by side

Turning Circle · U-turn compare

kerb-to-kerb, 2 cars
Tap to add/remove
TightestFord RangerTightest turn at 12.9m, needs the least road to swing around
Ford RangerTightest12.9 m
Large△ 3-point
RAM 150014.4 m
Large△ 3-point
Scrub the turn

0 of 2 clear a 7.0 m street in one sweep

Green cars complete the U-turn; amber need a 3-point turn. Drag the slider to test tighter streets.

Under 10 m · Excellent 10–11 m · Good 11–12 m · Average Over 12 m · Large

Standard widths: AU local streets ~5.5–7 m; main roads ~9–12 m.

True Cost to Own

Based on 15,000km of annual driving, fuel costs roughly $1,967/year for the Ford Ranger and $3,734/year for the RAM 1500. That is a $1,767 annual difference in favour of the Ford Ranger.

Estimated annual total: $1,967 (Ford Ranger) vs $3,734 (RAM 1500). The Ford Ranger saves you roughly $1,767 per year in total ownership costs. Use our Fuel Cost Calculator to estimate based on your driving.

Warranty: 5 years / 999,999km (Ford Ranger) vs 3 years / 100,000km (RAM 1500). The Ford Ranger has longer coverage.

Who Should Buy Which?

Buy the Ford Ranger if: You want the lower entry price, want lower running costs, value a longer warranty, or prefer Ford's approach to design and ownership experience.

Buy the RAM 1500 if: You prioritise performance, need stronger towing, or prefer RAM's approach to design and ownership experience.

The Verdict

The RAM 1500 takes 4 of 7 key spec categories. The Ford Ranger will save you roughly $1,767 a year in fuel. The Ford Ranger adds peace of mind with a longer 5-year warranty. The best pick depends on what you value most. Explore the full specs for each model below.

Common questions

Which is cheapest, Ford Ranger and RAM 1500?

The Ford Ranger is the cheapest at $37,130 before on-road costs. That undercuts the RAM 1500 by $82,820.

Which is the most fuel-efficient?

The Ford Ranger uses the least fuel at 6.9L/100km on the combined cycle.

Which is safest?

They are evenly matched — Ford Ranger all hold a 5-star ANCAP rating. Compare the active-safety features above to separate them.

Which has the most boot space?

The RAM 1500 has the largest boot at 900L.

Which can tow the most?

The RAM 1500 has the highest braked towing capacity at 4,500kg.

Which has the best warranty?

The Ford Ranger has the longest warranty at 5 years / Unlimited.

Which is the most powerful?

The RAM 1500 makes the most power at 291kW. The RAM 1500 is quickest to 100km/h in 7.5s.

Free alerts

Track the cars you're comparing

Get price-drop and spec-change alerts on the models in this comparison, plus our weekly new-car rundown of launches, deals and reviews.

  • Price-drop alerts on these models
  • Spec-change alerts
  • Weekly new-car rundown

No spam, unsubscribe anytime. By subscribing you agree to receive marketing emails.

Disclaimer: All information in this comparison was believed to be correct at the time of publishing (20 April 2026). Prices are manufacturer recommended retail prices (RRP) and may vary by state, dealer, and options. Driveaway costs include estimated on-road costs for Victoria. Fuel economy figures are WLTP/ADR combined cycle. Specifications can change without notice. Always verify with the manufacturer before making a purchase decision. CarSorted does not accept payment for recommendations.

Auto-generated from CarSorted's specification data · 20 April 2026

Comments (0)

Sign in to join the conversation

No comments yet. Be the first!

More head-to-heads

Other matchups worth a look

Same segment, similar money. Tap any pair for the full side-by-side spec sheet.

All comparisons

Images are representative. Actual variant trim, colour and equipment may differ.

Browse all cars · All Utes · Best utes in Australia