Compare performance (170 HP vs 269 HP), boot space and price (36,200 £ vs 67,300 £ ) at a glance. Find out which car is the better choice for you – Nissan Interstar or Ford Transit Transporter?
Price and efficiency are key factors when choosing a car – and this is often where the real differences emerge.
Nissan Interstar is substantially cheaper – starting at 36,200 £ , while the Ford Transit Transporter costs 67,300 £ . That’s a price difference of around 31,150 £.
As for electric range, the Nissan Interstar offers very slightly more range – reaching up to 410 km, about 8 km more than the Ford Transit Transporter.
Power, torque and acceleration say a lot about how a car feels on the road. This is where you see which model delivers more driving dynamics.
When it comes to engine power, the Ford Transit Transporter offers visibly more power – delivering 269 HP compared to 170 HP. That’s roughly 99 HP more horsepower.
There’s also a difference in torque: the Ford Transit Transporter delivers slightly more torque with 430 Nm compared to 380 Nm. That’s about 50 Nm more.
Beyond pure performance, interior space and usability matter most in daily life. This is where you see which car is more practical and versatile.
Seats: Ford Transit Transporter offers more seats – 6 vs 3.
The Ford Transit Transporter leads convincingly 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 Nissan Interstar is a sensible, no-nonsense panel van that puts practicality front and center, with a cavernous load area and a durable feel built for daily work. It drives with surprising composure for its size, keeps running costs modest, and feels like the kind of professional tool that prefers reliable service over flashy showboating.
details
The Ford Transit is the no-nonsense workhorse that turns heavy-duty hauling into a surprisingly civilized experience, with a cabin that favors practicality over pretense. It’s the go-to for tradespeople and fleet managers who want reliability, adaptability and low running headaches — not showy gimmicks.
detailsCosts and Consumption |
|
|---|---|
|
Price
36,200 - 54,800 £
|
Price
67,300 - 73,000 £
|
|
Consumption L/100km
7.5 - 7.8 L/100km
|
Consumption L/100km
-
|
|
Consumption kWh/100km
-
|
Consumption kWh/100km
-
|
|
Electric Range
410 km
|
Electric Range
341 - 402 km
|
|
Battery Capacity
-
|
Battery Capacity
-
|
|
co2
0 - 205 g/km
|
co2
0 g/km
|
|
Fuel tank capacity
-
|
Fuel tank capacity
-
|
Dimensions and Body |
|
|---|---|
|
Body Type
Cargo Van
|
Body Type
Cargo Van
|
|
Seats
3
|
Seats
3 - 6
|
|
Doors
-
|
Doors
-
|
|
Curb weight
2,053 - 2,455 kg
|
Curb weight
-
|
|
Trunk capacity
-
|
Trunk capacity
-
|
|
Length
-
|
Length
-
|
|
Width
2,080 mm
|
Width
2,059 mm
|
|
Height
-
|
Height
-
|
|
Max trunk capacity
-
|
Max trunk capacity
-
|
|
Payload
1,045 - 1,447 kg
|
Payload
-
|
Engine and Performance |
|
|---|---|
|
Engine Type
Diesel, Electric
|
Engine Type
Electric
|
|
Transmission
Manuel, Automatic
|
Transmission
Automatic
|
|
Transmission Detail
Manual Gearbox, Automatic Gearbox, Reduction Gearbox
|
Transmission Detail
Reduction Gearbox
|
|
Drive Type
Front-Wheel Drive
|
Drive Type
Rear-Wheel Drive
|
|
Power HP
130 - 170 HP
|
Power HP
184 - 269 HP
|
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
-
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
-
|
|
Max Speed
-
|
Max Speed
-
|
|
Torque
300 - 380 Nm
|
Torque
430 Nm
|
|
Number of Cylinders
4
|
Number of Cylinders
-
|
|
Power kW
96 - 125 kW
|
Power kW
135 - 198 kW
|
|
Engine capacity
1,997 cm3
|
Engine capacity
-
|
General |
|
|---|---|
|
Model Year
2024
|
Model Year
2024
|
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
G, A
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
A
|
|
Brand
Nissan
|
Brand
Ford
|