Compare performance (281 HP vs 202 HP), boot space and price (48,400 £ vs 33,400 £ ) at a glance. Find out which car is the better choice for you – Ford Ranger or KGM Musso?
Price and efficiency are often the first things buyers look at. Here it becomes clear which model has the long-term edge – whether at the pump, the plug, or in purchase price.
KGM Musso is significantly cheaper – starting at 33,400 £ , while the Ford Ranger costs 48,400 £ . That’s a price difference of around 15,019 £.
Fuel consumption also shows a difference: the Ford Ranger uses 3.1 L/100km and is clearly more efficient than the KGM Musso with 8.5 L/100km. The difference is about 5.4 L/100km.
Power, torque and acceleration are the classic benchmarks for car enthusiasts – and here, some clear differences start to show.
When it comes to engine power, the Ford Ranger offers clearly more power – delivering 281 HP compared to 202 HP. That’s roughly 79 HP more horsepower.
There’s also a difference in torque: the Ford Ranger delivers markedly more torque with 697 Nm compared to 441 Nm. That’s about 256 Nm more.
Cabin size, boot volume and payload all play a role in everyday practicality. Here, comfort and flexibility make the difference.
Both vehicles offer seating for 5 people.
In terms of curb weight, KGM Musso is a bit lighter – 2,070 kg compared to 2,405 kg. The difference is around 335 kg.
When it comes to payload, the KGM Musso carries only slightly more – 1,085 kg compared to 989 kg. That’s a difference of about 96 kg.
The Ford Ranger stands well ahead of its rival in the objective data comparison.
This result only shows which model scores more points on paper – not which of the two cars feels right for you.
The Ford Ranger is a workhorse with the manners of a grown-up pickup—practical, tough, and surprisingly civilized on the road. It’s the sort of truck that laughs at mud on the weekend and performs like a sensible daily driver during the week, making it an easy sell for buyers who want capability without theatrics.
detailsThe Musso is a rugged, no-nonsense pickup that balances practical utility with a comfortable cabin, making it equally at home on a jobsite or a weekend drive. It’s a sensible choice for drivers who want straightforward capability, durability and a reassuringly solid feel without unnecessary complexity.
details
Costs and Consumption |
|
|---|---|
|
Price
48,400 - 57,500 £
|
Price
33,400 - 44,100 £
|
|
Consumption L/100km
3.1 - 10.1 L/100km
|
Consumption L/100km
8.5 - 9.4 L/100km
|
|
Consumption kWh/100km
-
|
Consumption kWh/100km
-
|
|
Electric Range
42 km
|
Electric Range
-
|
|
Battery Capacity
-
|
Battery Capacity
-
|
|
co2
70 - 265 g/km
|
co2
223 - 246 g/km
|
|
Fuel tank capacity
-
|
Fuel tank capacity
-
|
Dimensions and Body |
|
|---|---|
|
Body Type
Pickup
|
Body Type
Pickup
|
|
Seats
4 - 5
|
Seats
5
|
|
Doors
-
|
Doors
-
|
|
Curb weight
2,405 - 2,511 kg
|
Curb weight
2,070 - 2,185 kg
|
|
Trunk capacity
-
|
Trunk capacity
-
|
|
Length
-
|
Length
-
|
|
Width
1,918 mm
|
Width
1,950 mm
|
|
Height
-
|
Height
-
|
|
Max trunk capacity
-
|
Max trunk capacity
-
|
|
Payload
845 - 989 kg
|
Payload
860 - 1,085 kg
|
Engine and Performance |
|
|---|---|
|
Engine Type
Diesel, Plugin Hybrid
|
Engine Type
Diesel
|
|
Transmission
Automatic
|
Transmission
Manuel, Automatic
|
|
Transmission Detail
Automatic Gearbox
|
Transmission Detail
Manual Gearbox, Automatic Gearbox
|
|
Drive Type
All-Wheel Drive
|
Drive Type
All-Wheel Drive
|
|
Power HP
240 - 281 HP
|
Power HP
202 HP
|
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
8.7 - 9.2 s
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
-
|
|
Max Speed
-
|
Max Speed
-
|
|
Torque
600 - 697 Nm
|
Torque
400 - 441 Nm
|
|
Number of Cylinders
4 - 6
|
Number of Cylinders
4
|
|
Power kW
177 - 207 kW
|
Power kW
149 kW
|
|
Engine capacity
2,261 - 2,993 cm3
|
Engine capacity
2,157 cm3
|
General |
|
|---|---|
|
Model Year
2025
|
Model Year
2026
|
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
G, B
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
G
|
|
Brand
Ford
|
Brand
KGM
|