2019 Ford Ranger Vs. 2019 Chevrolet Colorado: A Classic Ford-Chevy Confrontation Renewed

2019 Ford Ranger and 2019 Chevrolet Colorado Illustration

By Brian Normile

For our last (for now, anyway) comparison involving the all-new 2019 Ford Ranger, let's look at the Chevrolet Colorado, the mid-size truck offered by Ford's long-standing enemy. Although not the top seller in the class (which is the Toyota Tacoma), the Colorado is well-established in the mid-size marketplace as a solid competitor. Redesigned for the 2015 model year, the Colorado is ahead of the new Ranger when it comes to engine offerings (3), wheelbase choices (2), and, possibly, feature combinations — including a pair of impressive dedicated off-road versions in the ZR2 and ZR2 Bison.

Related: 2019 Chevrolet Colorado ZR2 Bison: Hitting the Trails That Hit Back

For now, let's focus on the more practical sides of these mid-size trucks, including measurements, fuel economy, and towing and hauling. Here's how they compare:

 

Measurements

RANGER (in inches; all models unless otherwise noted)

  • Wheelbase: 126.8 (only one offered)
  • Length: 210.8
  • Width: 85.8 (from mirror to mirror)
  • Height: 71.1 (SuperCrew 4x2 and SuperCab 4x4); 71.5 (SuperCrew 4x4); 70.7 (SuperCab 4x2)

COLORADO

  • Wheelbase: 128.3 (extended and crew cab); 140.5 (crew cab with 6-foot-2-inch bed)
  • Length: 212.7 (extended and crew cab); 224.9 (crew cab with 6-foot-2-inch bed)
  • Width: 74.3
  • Height: 70.4 or 70.3 (extended cab with two-wheel drive or four-wheel drive); 70.7 or 70.6 (crew cab, 5-foot-2-inch bed with 2WD or 4WD); 70.6 or 70.5 (crew cab, 6-foot-2-inch bed with 2WD or 4WD)

 

Fuel Economy

2019 Ford Ranger Exterior

The Ranger's sole powertrain when it first goes on sale will be the turbocharged 2.3-liter EcoBoost four-cylinder paired with a 10-speed automatic transmission. The Colorado, meanwhile, has more diversity among its available engines: a 2.5-liter inline four-cylinder gas engine, a 3.6-liter V-6 gas engine and a 2.8-liter inline four-cylinder turbo-diesel. The gas four-cylinder is available with either a six-speed manual or six-speed automatic transmission; the diesel gets the same six-speed automatic, while the V-6 gets an 8-speed automatic. V-6 and diesel Colorados will run 3.42:1 axle gears; the four-cylinder offers standard 4.10:1 gears.

As we recently covered, the Ranger narrowly takes the gas engine mpg crown from the Colorado, at least according to the EPA. The Colorado's available diesel engine is still the overall mpg leader among all available engines, however. All Rangers will offer 3.73:1 axle gears.

RANGER

  • 21/26/23 mpg city/highway/combined (2WD)
  • 20/24/22 mpg (4WD)

COLORADO

  • 20/26/22 mpg (2WD four-cylinder gas engine)
  • 19/24/21 mpg (4WD four-cylinder gas engine)
  • 18/25/20 mpg (2WD V-6)
  • 17/24/19 mpg (4WD V-6)
  • 20/30/23 mpg (2WD diesel)
  • 19/28/22 mpg (4WD diesel)
  • 16/18/17 mpg (ZR2 V-6)
  • 18/22/19 mpg (ZR2 diesel)

 

Towing and Payload

2019 Chevrolet Colorado Hill Climbing

While we're still awaiting a full breakdown of the Ranger's various trim level towing and payload capabilities, we do have the maximum numbers for now.

RANGER

  • Bed length: 61 inches (SuperCrew); 72.8 inches (SuperCab)
  • Max payload: 1,560 pounds (SuperCrew 4x4); 1,650 (SuperCab 4x4); 1,770 (SuperCrew 4x2); 1,860 (SuperCab 4x2)
  • Max towing capacity: 7,500 pounds

COLORADO

  • Bed length: 62 inches or 74 inches
  • Max payload: 1,100 pounds (ZR2); 1,366 (Z71 extended cab, 5-foot-2-inch bed with 2WD four-cylinder gas engine and Z71 crew cab, 6-foot-2-inch bed with 4WD diesel) to 1,574 (Work Truck extended cab, 5-foot-2-inch bed with 2WD V-6)
  • Max towing: 3,500 pounds (2WD extended cab with either 5-foot-2-inch or 6-foot-2-inch bed and four-cylinder gas engine) to 7,000 (2WD and 4WD models with quipped with max tow package and V-6, excluding ZR2) or 7,700 (2WD models equipped with Max Tow Package and diesel engine)

More From PickupTrucks.com:

Cars.com graphic by Paul Dolan; photo by Angela Conner; manufacturer images

 

Chevrolet Colorado Towing Motorcylces


Comments

I think the biggest draw back in buying a Ranger is it does not come with AWD, just 2wd and 4hi and 4lo.
On streets with patching now/ice and wet roads you do not want to run in 4hi, it can tear the drive train apart.

I held out on the Colorado for 2 years until it came with awd...

that is Patchy snow/ice

@dave

It's simpler just to move to Florida. No snow. No ice. No salt. Without snow/ice the importance of 4wd shrinks a bit.

I've owned AWD cars/trucks where you don't even think about it because you never have a problem getting traction. I owned my Silverado for at least five years before I realized it had a locking diff.

Sunshine State baby!

@dave

It's simpler just to move to Florida. No snow. No ice. No salt. Without snow/ice the importance of 4wd shrinks a bit.

I've owned AWD cars/trucks where you don't even think about it because you never have a problem getting traction. I owned my Silverado for at least five years before I realized it had a locking diff.

Sunshine State baby!


Posted by: papajim | Dec 17, 2018 11:43:22 AM

i hear it's a real swell SH!THOLE

How about another theory.

Ranger and Gladiator further dilute the market. No one can sell enough trucks to justify any meaningful investment. The entire segment ages until they can no longer meat safety/efficiency standards and everyone but Toyota and Nissan leave the market.

I just can't help but seeing history repeat itself here.

@Ford Rules...

You are often accused of reactions that are totally out of proportion to the situation.

How many times have you been arrested over it? Do you have any ex-wives or girlfriends who refuse to be in same room with you? Can you recite the 12 Steps without looking a the book?

Your response to a casual comment about weather tells it all.

@Ford Rules...

You are often accused of reactions that are totally out of proportion to the situation.

How many times have you been arrested over it? Do you have any ex-wives or girlfriends who refuse to be in same room with you? Can you recite the 12 Steps without looking a the book?

Your response to a casual comment about weather tells it all.


Posted by: papajim | Dec 17, 2018 3:07:55 PM

thanks i'll take that as a compliment you phucking hypocrite

No snow sounds good to me. When I retire I am moving to where there is no snow. Just like papajim said if you live somewhere that doesn't have snow or ice you don't need 4 wheel drive or all wheel drive. You also don't need snow shovels, snow throwers, down jackets and a few other things. Sounds good to me.

@Ford rules...

I'll take that as a YES

This classic Ford-vs- Chevy will end the way they always do. With Ford selling more trucks. Just the truth @$$ clowns.

@ fake imposter....please get yout own name

The classic GM vs Ford will end with GM twins outperforming Ford like they always do. Half ton, HD's, and now midsize.

Just a long list of GM dominance

Thats the truth...psst ...just pull up archives here and it will back up my claim!

The Rangwe has the engine the Colorado needs, and the Colorado has the longer wheelbase and longer bed behind a crew cab.

The Rangwe has the engine the Colorado needs, and the Colorado has the longer wheelbase and longer bed behind a crew cab.

If GM puts the new 2.7L I4 engine (310HP, 348 lb-ft of torque) in the 2020 refreshed Colorado, it will out-perform the Ranger, and it will run circles around the anemic Taco. Unfortunately, in true GM fashion, they will probably only offer it on their most expensive Colorado and Canyon models (of which most people don't need or want) and make you pay big bucks to get it.

Restore Any Battery Including Car Batteries To Brand New Condition Visit https://bit.ly/2USYMIH

.,.,.,

.,.,.,Restore Any Battery Including Car Batteries To Brand New Condition Visit https://bit.ly/2USYMIH

Thank you for sharing valuable information. Nice post. I enjoyed reading this post

Strength is shown in the payload and towing numbers where the Ford has a huge lead. As one poster noted, the Colorado will look pretty in the driveway. However, as the specs show, that's why you'd buy it, not to do any serious hauling or towing. If you want a mid-size truck that you can preen over while your neighbors admire its look, then either truck will do. But if you want the truck for functionality in the real world, the Ranger is your choice.
Posted by: Dale | Dec 16, 2018 10:46:13 AM

LOL uh huh

Everyone here knows that Ford is legendary for inflated towing and payload numbers.

I'm willing to bet this Ranger is saddled with the same awful IWE 4WD setup that's failed over and over again on the 2015 and up F-150's. A combination of cheap plastic gears, unreliable vacuum pumps, cheap solenoids, cheap check valves, and vacuum lines. And that 2.3 Ecoboost... famous for blown headgaskets and a real problem with heat causing the ECU to pull timing and boost because it can barely run right on 87 octane fuel. This truck is going to be a reliability nightmare for service departments for the next 3 to 4 years.

Strength is shown in the payload and towing numbers where the Ford has a huge lead. As one poster noted, the Colorado will look pretty in the driveway. However, as the specs show, that's why you'd buy it, not to do any serious hauling or towing. If you want a mid-size truck that you can preen over while your neighbors admire its look, then either truck will do. But if you want the truck for functionality in the real world, the Ranger is your choice.
Posted by: Dale | Dec 16, 2018 10:46:13 AM

LOL uh huh

Everyone here knows that Ford is legendary for inflated towing and payload numbers.

I'm willing to bet this Ranger is saddled with the same awful IWE 4WD setup that's failed over and over again on the 2015 and up F-150's. A combination of cheap plastic gears, unreliable vacuum pumps, cheap solenoids, cheap check valves, and vacuum lines. And that 2.3 Ecoboost... famous for blown headgaskets and a real problem with heat causing the ECU to pull timing and boost because it can barely run right on 87 octane fuel. This truck is going to be a reliability nightmare for service departments for the next 3 to 4 years.

Posted by: The_Truth | Dec 18, 2018 11:18:19 PM


Sounds like the original "Brick" post.

Hello gang! As a satisfied owner for three years and 58,000+ miles now I have to say the real world mileage is close to the above estimates, however only if you have a lead foot, if driven at the speed limits in a casual manner mine regularly gets and average of 18 city, 26 highway and 20 combined, in some instances, like on the Over Sea Highway in The Florida Keys where there is a stretch about 25 miles at 40-50 mph, on a very slow mid week summer day I averaged 32mpg with the cruise control on at the speed limits, just the wife and I with an empty bed and the tires at 36 psi, with premium Sunoco 93 gas. I might note that is all with the front air dam removed. I also have a travel trailer we have traveled with all over the east coast, from as far north as Bar Harbor, to as far south as Key West. Plus we have taken a 4 month camping trip from central Florida, down to The Keys, then as far west as Pikes Peak CO, with stops on the Texas Gulf Coast and stops all in between. All at a CGVW off a Cat Scale at 9,817 lbs! On that trip we averaged 15 mpg towing a 4,100 lbs camper with another just over 1200 lbs of passengers, dogs and stuff, like food and bottled water. While never having a shortage of power or maintaining the speed limits in mountain passes, in total comfort and safety. In a few months we are contemplating replacing the truck, I'm sill not sure with what, I do want to take a look at the new Silverado Inline 6 Diesel.

Of course the Ranger will sell well; it's silly to think otherwise. Duramax starts at $36K; must choose a crew cab; many extra features standard many customers don't want a luxury pickup just to get the diesel. I'd love a 4 cylinder diesel but not in a mid size that's larger and $8K more than my full size. Heavier and only one higher mpg than my full size. What's the point of offering a thrifty diesel to save money if it's $14K more and much more truck than alot of people want or need. Don't tell me for heavy towing. It's 181 hp no matter how much torque it has. I'd say the same for the 3.0L PSD in F150 that starts at $44.3K. Ford could increase that 7500 tow number with a crew cab 6' bed with the same power train, but they'll have a redesign in about three years; hopefully a larger 4 cylinder like a 3.4L; two versions, NA and turbo charged. It'll be an inch wider and longer

Glad to see the new mid size Ford. Hope it is all they think it will be because GM is about to do a major refresh on the twins and there is even more competition coming to market soon.



The comments to this entry are closed.