Nissan NP200 vs Ford Ranger

In-depth comparison in South Africa covering price, performance, fuel efficiency, safety, practicality and long-term ownership costs.

Nissan NP200 in South Africa

Nissan NP200

1.6 Safety Pack Manual Petrol Manual
ZAR 284,900 ex-showroom
⚡ 65 kW (87 hp)
🔧 147 Nm
⛽ 12.5 km/l
VS
Ford Ranger in South Africa

Ford Ranger

2.0 Bi-Turbo Raptor 4x4 Automatic Diesel Automatic
ZAR 1,040,000 ex-showroom
⚡ 157 kW (211 hp)
🔧 500 Nm
⛽ 12.8 km/l
+

Add a 3rd car to compare

Quick Winners

Performance Ranger
Mileage NP200
🔑 Ownership Ranger

Overall Comparison Score

🏆 Winner
#1

Ranger

70
/ 100
+25
pts
#2

NP200

45
/ 100

High confidence result.

Executive Summary

Ranger dominates this comparison with clear advantages across multiple categories.

Key Differences At A Glance

Performance Ranger +11 pts
Efficiency NP200 +2 pts
Safety Ranger +8 pts
Practicality Ranger +4 pts
Ownership Ranger +4 pts

Category Score Breakdown

🏆 Overall Winner

Ranger

Performance 17/20
Efficiency 6/20
Safety 20/20
Practicality 11/20
Ownership 16/20

NP200

Performance 6/20
Efficiency 8/20
Safety 12/20
Practicality 7/20
Ownership 12/20

Pros & Cons

NP200

Pros
  • Better fuel efficiency
Cons
  • Less powerful engine setup
  • Less comprehensive safety features
  • Less practical in daily usage
  • Shorter warranty coverage
Best For: Fuel Efficiency
🏆 Overall Winner

Ranger

Pros
  • More powerful engine output
  • Stronger safety package
  • More practical for daily use
  • Better long-term ownership value
Cons
  • Lower fuel efficiency
Best For: Highway Driving Family Usage

Who Should Buy Which?

NP200

  • Buyers looking for better fuel efficiency

Ranger

  • Drivers who prioritise strong highway performance and overtaking power
  • Families prioritising stronger safety equipment
  • Large families needing more practicality and usability
  • Long-term owners valuing warranty and ownership peace of mind

Full Specification Comparison

Specification NP200 Ranger
Ground Clearance 185 283
Wheelbase 2400 3270
Length 4535 5381
Width 1615 2180
Height 1530 1922
Kerb Weight 915 2345
Gross Vehicle Weight 1570 3130
Seating Capacity 2 5
Boot Space Not Applicable 0
Towing Capacity 500 2500
Front Track Width 1390 -
Rear Track Width 1385 -
Turning Radius 5.5 -
Load Bed Length 1815 -
Load Bed Width 1530 -
Specification NP200 Ranger
Engine 1.6L Naturally Aspirated Petrol 2.0L Bi-Turbo Diesel
Engine Type Inline 4 Cylinder Inline 4 Twin Turbocharged Intercooled
Displacement 1598 1996
Cylinders 4 4
Valves per Cylinder 4 4
Power 65 157
Power @ RPM 5200 rpm -
Torque 147 500
Torque @ RPM 2800 rpm -
Fuel System Multi-Point Injection Common Rail Direct Injection
Turbocharger Not Available -
Top Speed 155 180
0-100 km/h 14.5 10.2
Compression Ratio 9.5:1 -
Engine Position Front Longitudinal -

Final Verdict

🏆 Ford Ranger wins with 70 pts vs 45 pts for NP200

In structured scoring, Ranger emerges as the stronger overall package. However, NP200 may appeal to buyers prioritising different factors. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your driving priorities in South Africa.

People Also Compare

Popular comparisons among buyers considering similar options.

Frequently Asked Questions

Based on structured category scoring, Ranger performs better overall in South Africa. However, final choice depends on driving priorities.

NP200 scores 8 while Ranger scores 6 in efficiency. Real-world mileage may vary based on driving conditions.

In safety scoring, NP200 scores 12 and Ranger scores 20. Both offer competitive safety packages in this segment.

NP200 scores 12 versus Ranger scoring 16. Warranty coverage and ownership value influence this result.

Practicality scoring gives NP200 7 and Ranger 11, reflecting cabin space and usability.

Performance category shows NP200 scoring 6 compared to Ranger scoring 17, indicating stronger overtaking capability.

While resale depends on market demand, ownership and brand positioning suggest Ranger may hold stronger long-term value.

Off-road suitability depends on drivetrain and ground clearance. Refer to the full specification comparison for detailed technical differences.

Efficiency and ownership categories influence running costs. Ranger performs slightly stronger overall in structured scoring.

Value depends on feature set, performance and ownership coverage. Structured comparison gives Ranger the overall advantage.

Detailed Comparison Analysis

The comparison between NP200 and Ranger in South Africa evaluates performance, efficiency, safety, practicality and long-term ownership value.

Performance: NP200 scores 6 vs 17.

Efficiency: NP200 scores 8 vs 6.

Safety: NP200 scores 12 vs 20.

Practicality: NP200 scores 7 vs 11.

Ownership: NP200 scores 12 vs 16.

Final structured scoring gives Ranger the advantage in this comparison.