Ram 3500 Laramie 6.4L vs Ranger XL 2.0T (LOW) Comparison

Car Information

Engine / Motor

/

180 km/h

/

4

/

1998 cc

/

GCC

Dimensions

6

5 Seater

6,066

5370 mm

2,012

1918 mm

1,981

1884 mm

3,785

3270 mm

/

4 Doors

/

1200 L

/

230 m

Fuel Economy

7.6 Km/L

8 Km/L

/

80 L

/

8 Km/L

Comfort

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Keyless Entry

/

Interior

/

/

Fabric

/

Digital

/

Single

/

/

/

/

Electric

/

/

Standard

Safety

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Infotainment

/

10

/

/

/

/

Android LCD

/

/

6

Transmission

6-speed AISIN Automatic

/

Chassis & Steering

/

Four Wheel Drive

Key Spec

5.7 L

2.0 L - 3.2 L

383 BHP

118 BHP - 392 BHP

TBD

10AT & 6MT & AT & Automatic & Manual

Petrol

Diesel & Gasoline & Petrol

TBD

TBD

2 Seater

3 Seater - 5

Engine

6.4L

2.0 L

Gasoline

Diesel

410

168 BHP

582

405 Nm

/

In-Line

/

Single Turbo

/

4

Exterior

/

/

/

/

/

/

Halogen

/

/

Technologies

/

/

/

Comparison of configuration highlights

  • Ram 3500 Laramie 6.4L

    • Ranger XL 2.0T (LOW)

      • Electronic engine immobilizer
      • Rear Defogger
      • Heated Side Mirrors
      • Heater
      • Rear Camera
      • Headlight On Reminder
      • Remote key types
      • Steering Adjustment
      • Anti-Theft Alarm System
      • Speed Sensing Auto Door Lock
      • Driver Seat Belt Warning
      • ABS
      • EBD/CBC
      • EBA/BA
      • Passive Pedestrian Protection
      • Child Lock
      • Speed Alert
      • Active braking

    Review Comparison

    Positive

    • No data found

    Negative

    • No data found

    Positive

    • No data found

    Negative

    • No data found

    Related comparisons

    Editor's PickRanger XL 2.0T (LOW)

    Expert / Editor Recommendation

    Choose Ram 3500 Laramie 6.4L if you care more about interior space; choose Ranger XL 2.0T (LOW) if you care more about fuel economy.

    Q&A

    • According to fuel consumption data, Ram 3500 Laramie 6.4L has a fuel consumption of 13.16, while Ranger XL 2.0T (LOW) has a fuel consumption of 12.5. Therefore, Ranger XL 2.0T (LOW) is more fuel-efficient.
    • In terms of interior space, Ram 3500 Laramie 6.4L has a wheelbase of 3,785, while Ranger XL 2.0T (LOW) has a wheelbase of 3270 mm. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, Ram 3500 Laramie 6.4L, offers more room.
    • Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. Ram 3500 Laramie 6.4L uses No data, while Ranger XL 2.0T (LOW) uses Four Wheel Drive.