Ford Ranger vs Toyota Tacoma: Specs Compared
Also searched as Toyota Tacoma vs Ford Ranger specs — both orientations show this same side-by-side comparison.
The Toyota Tacoma is the more efficient of the two: it reaches 24 mpg combined versus 23 mpg for the Ford Ranger, a 1 mpg advantage and costs about $100 less per year to fuel.
Across 4 measured categories, the Toyota Tacoma leads in 4. Figures are EPA test data, not manufacturer claims.
2019–2026
Ford Ranger
Standard Pickup Trucks 4WD · 32 configurations
2015–2026
Toyota Tacoma
Small Pickup Trucks 4WD · 90 configurations
Head-to-head specifications
| Metric | Ford Ranger | Toyota Tacoma |
|---|---|---|
| Best combined MPG | 23 mpg | 24 mpg ✓ |
| Best city MPG | 21 mpg | 23 mpg ✓ |
| Best highway MPG | 26 mpg | 26 mpg |
| Lowest annual fuel costEPA estimate at 15,000 miles per year | $2,650 | $2,550 ✓ |
| Lowest CO2 output | 380 g/mi | 379 g/mi ✓ |
| Engines offered | SIDI & PFI, SIDI, SIDI & PFI; with Stop-start, SIDI; with Stop-start | SIDI & PFI; 3-mode(Sport/Normal/Eco), w/SS, SIDI & PFI; 2-mode(Power/Normal) TM, w/SS, SIDI & PFI, SIDI & PFI; 3-mode (Sport/Normal/Eco) TM |
| Transmissions | Automatic (S10) | Automatic (S8), Manual 6-spd, Automatic (S6) |
| Drivetrains | Part-time 4-Wheel Drive, Rear-Wheel Drive | Rear-Wheel Drive, Part-time 4-Wheel Drive, 4-Wheel Drive |
| Fuel types | Regular | Regular |
| EPA class | Standard Pickup Trucks 4WD | Small Pickup Trucks 4WD |
| Years covered | 2019–2026 | 2015–2026 |
| Configurations on record | 32 | 90 |
Source: EPA fuel economy records via fueleconomy.gov. Best-case values across all recorded configurations for each model.
Ford Ranger vs Toyota Tacoma dimensions and size
The Toyota Tacoma is 2.4 inches longer than the Ford Ranger on a wheelbase 3.1 inches longer, and 220.5 lbs lighter. At over 200 inches, the larger of the two is past the comfortable limit of a standard 192-inch single garage bay once you allow walking room.
| Dimension | Ford Ranger (2026) | Toyota Tacoma (2026) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length | 210.6 in | 213 in | 2.4 in |
| Width (excl. mirrors) | 79.9 in | 76.8 in | 3.1 in |
| Height | 76 in | 74 in | 2 in |
| Wheelbase | 128.7 in | 131.9 in | 3.1 in |
| Curb weight | 5,324 lbs | 5,104 lbs | 221 lbs |
Width excludes mirrors; add 8–12 inches for mirrors out. Figures are for the newest model year on record for each vehicle. See both drawn to scale.
Ford Ranger vs Toyota Tacoma: what the numbers mean
Running cost over five years: at the EPA's 15,000-mile-a-year assumption the Toyota Tacoma burns about $2,550 of fuel annually against $2,650 for the Ford Ranger. That $100 yearly gap compounds to roughly $500 over five years and $800 over eight — often more than the price difference between two trims of the same vehicle, and the single largest running-cost line item separating these two.
City and highway economy: the Toyota Tacoma leads in both cycles — 23 mpg city and 26 mpg highway against 21 and 26 mpg — so its fuel-efficiency advantage holds whether you commute in traffic or cover long highway miles.
Powertrain choice: the Ford Ranger is recorded with 4 distinct engine configurations (SIDI & PFI, SIDI, SIDI & PFI; with Stop-start), the Toyota Tacoma with 4 (SIDI & PFI; 3-mode(Sport/Normal/Eco), w/SS, SIDI & PFI; 2-mode(Power/Normal) TM, w/SS, SIDI & PFI). Across 32 recorded Ford Ranger configurations and 90 for the Toyota Tacoma, the wider the engine spread the more the real-world fuel efficiency depends on which version you actually buy, so check the specific model year and drivetrain rather than the headline number.
Drivetrain and class: the Ford Ranger is offered with Part-time 4-Wheel Drive, Rear-Wheel Drive, the Toyota Tacoma with Rear-Wheel Drive, Part-time 4-Wheel Drive, 4-Wheel Drive. All-wheel drive typically costs one to two mpg combined against the same vehicle in front- or rear-wheel drive, which is worth remembering when the gap between these two is small. The EPA classes them as Standard Pickup Trucks 4WD and Small Pickup Trucks 4WD respectively — the class drives the interior volume, cargo space and passenger space each one is measured against.
Tailpipe emissions: at their cleanest configurations the Toyota Tacoma emits 379 g/mile of CO2 versus 380 g/mile for the Ford Ranger. Emissions track fuel consumption almost exactly, so the cleaner vehicle here is also the cheaper one to fuel.
Ranger vs Tacoma: common questions
Which is better on gas, the Ford Ranger or the Toyota Tacoma?
The Toyota Tacoma is the more efficient of the two: it reaches 24 mpg combined versus 23 mpg for the Ford Ranger, a 1 mpg advantage and costs about $100 less per year to fuel.
Which costs less to run per year?
By EPA estimates at 15,000 miles a year, the Toyota Tacoma runs about $2,550 a year in fuel at its most efficient configuration, versus about $2,650 for the Ford Ranger — a difference of roughly $100 per year.
What engines do the Ranger and Tacoma offer?
Ford Ranger: SIDI & PFI, SIDI, SIDI & PFI; with Stop-start, SIDI; with Stop-start. Toyota Tacoma: SIDI & PFI; 3-mode(Sport/Normal/Eco), w/SS, SIDI & PFI; 2-mode(Power/Normal) TM, w/SS, SIDI & PFI, SIDI & PFI; 3-mode (Sport/Normal/Eco) TM.
Are they in the same vehicle class?
The EPA classifies the Ford Ranger as Standard Pickup Trucks 4WD and the Toyota Tacoma as Small Pickup Trucks 4WD, so they aren't a like-for-like match on size.
More Ranger comparisons
More Tacoma comparisons
Comparison id: ford-ranger-vs-toyota-tacoma