They are alike. Both are pickup trucks with turbo diesels, automatic transmissions and five-seat leather interiors. But still they are different. And they are so different that the Volkswagen Amarok can never be confused with the Ford Ranger, and vice versa.

Both pickup trucks are pickup trucks of the year, with the Amarok winning the title in 2010 and the Ranger two years later. The Amarok appeared in 2009, and reached Russia in 2010, and the Ranger is a product in 2012. However, last year the VW Amarok production moved from Argentina to Germany, and the long-awaited version with an automatic gearbox was introduced to the market. So both cars are relatively new, and the comparison is quite correct, especially since almost complete parity reigns in prices.

Appearance

One can argue about the appearance for a long time, some people like the emphasized faceted style of the German, and some like the smoothed outlines of the American. Ranger in the most expensive configuration WildTruck simply "screams" about the well-being of the owner: inscriptions on the sidewalls, on the stern, proud nameplates "3,2-6 auto" ... All this leaves no doubt about the "steepness". Amarok in Highline configuration is much more modest, its high cost does not give out practically anything. The visual difference from the cheapest versions is the wheel arch extensions and 18-inch wheels. However, both can be ordered as options in any configuration.

Ford has a longer length (5 395 mm versus 5 254 mm) and wheelbase (3 220 mm versus 3 095 mm), but Volkswagen wins in width (1 940 mm versus 1,850 mm). Overall, the Ranger looks faster and the Amarok looks more solid.

Body

Volkswagen is very proud that there are two Euro pallets in the Amarok body (1555x1620 mm), but in Ford (1549x1560 mm) there is only one. It would seem that the dimensions are very close, but it's all about the distance between the arches.

The Amarok has a distance of 1,220 mm, while the Ranger has 1,139 mm (here it is, the gain in width). The folding sides can withstand a fairly large load (up to 200 kg). The bodies of the two cars are covered with optional covers. Ford has a roller shutter and VW has an optional cover.

Both of these accessories are very expensive. In particular, for the "sliding curtain" Fords ask 65,900 rubles! I'll tell you a little secret - exactly the same roller shutters can be ordered from any seller of plastic windows, and they will cost 15,000 rubles. along with the installation. But these are still flowers. Do you know how much it costs "a plastic cover, body-colored, lockable, sealed?" RUB 139,300! Here, for sure, no censorship words remain.

Open all doors

Inside both pickups, five people can easily be accommodated ... However, there are nuances. The rear seats in the Amarok are wider, but the backrest is more vertical. Ranger pleases with a large amount of space in length. The backrest slope is close to that of a middle class car Second-row passengers are not provided with special amenities in both pickups. They are pleased with rather deep pockets in the doors, a 12 V socket for connecting gadgets, and electric windows.

For ergonomics, there are no serious claims in both pickups. But VW dispenses with the coolant temperature gauge, and the leather trim on the steering wheel and Ford selector is rough

From the driver's seat, the world is perceived differently. It is clear that any driver can fit in both cars, but ... The ergonomics of VW are close to ideal. It has been proven that in these leather chairs you can even overcome 800 km a day without stress. However, Ford seats are even better. In addition to the successful profile, there is also a complete set of electric drives, while in VW everything is regulated manually.

Having won in landing, Ford loses in finishing - the leather on the steering wheel and automatic transmission selector is rough. And the abundance of metallized plastic on the center console is not for everybody.

The gauges are perfectly readable in both cars, however, VW does without a coolant temperature sensor (not very clear "saving on matches"), and the blue arrows of Ford's gauges look frivolous and cartoonish.

Both cars were equipped with branded radio with navigation. Navigation with detailed cartography across Russia, but the graphics are not very good. The advantage of the Ford media system is that it reads third-party flash drives with pleasure, but VW cannot.

Flame motor and more

Under the hood, the main differences begin. The driving force behind the Ford is a 3.2-liter, 5-cylinder in-line turbo diesel that develops 200 hp. at 3000 rpm and 470 Nm at 2750 rpm. Automatic transmission 6-band, with a torque converter. There are sports and manual modes. Transfer case with low gear and rigidly connected front axle. In general, everything is more or less expected.

But VW is a complete surprise. The power of the twin-aspirated diesel engine was raised from 163 hp. up to 180 hp at 3000 rpm, and the torque shelf remained at the same 400 Nm in a narrow range of 1500-2100 rpm. The use of an 8-speed automatic for a commercial pickup truck is, frankly, a non-trivial solution and is encountered for the first time. According to the manufacturers, the additional stages provide a wider range of gear ratios (7.01) compared to traditional automatic transmissions and allows the diesel engine to work even more efficiently in any mode, providing lower fuel consumption and good dynamics. In reality, first gear (gear ratio - 4.70: 1) is only used to drive away and to overcome serious off-road conditions or towing. Working gears from the second to the sixth, which is "direct", and the seventh (0.84: 1) and eighth (0.67: 1) gears are already overdrive. Thanks to this, at 100 km / h in eighth gear, the tachometer shows 1900 rpm.

The automatic transmission is supplied to our market only in a set with permanent all-wheel drive and without a reduction gear, which significantly reduces off-road potential, but contributes to the stability of handling on hard surfaces. Permanent four-wheel drive is interesting: the Torsen asymmetrical center differential by default delivers 40% of the torque to the front wheels, and 60% to the rear. But these settings are not hard. Depending on the real road conditions, this ratio can vary from 60/40 to 20/80.

The front brakes are ventilated discs, and the rear ones are drum brakes (also design features).

The automatic transmissions of both cars are full-fledged, with torque converters, sport and manual modes. Ford is equipped with a transfer case with a reduction gear and a rigidly connected front axle. Volkswagen has permanent all-wheel drive without "lowering"

Gentlemen, start the engines

As always, any test begins with leaving a tight Moscow parking lot. And here Ford wins. Special thanks for the visibility - it is at a very high level. True, the front pillars are thick, but in the age of hypodynamia, it is even useful to turn your head, with visibility back everything is not bad - thanks to the large mugs of the mirrors, almost without distortion. But a salon mirror with such dimensions becomes an accessory, and the fact that a picture from a rear-view camera is displayed on it is a controversial decision. The picture is small and the camera itself gets dirty quickly. But, on the other hand, VW does not offer cameras at all.

In the tightness of parking lots, you understand that parking sensors are not superfluous, especially since with such dimensions, the Ranger does not, as expected, amaze with maneuverability, and the steering wheel has to be turned intensively.

Pouring into the mess of traffic jams, you note the correct operation of the machine, which allows you to both trudge in the stream and instantly accelerate. But the city is still cramped, so we break out of the Moscow Ring Road. This is where the potential of the 200-horsepower engine is fully revealed. The light pickup (2,083 kg curb weight) accelerates easily and at any speed. But controllability remains a question. She "approaches the passenger", but only approaches.

On broken country roads, an empty car, working out the relief, rumbles with unsprung masses of wheels, and the kinematics of the rear suspension (continuous axle) requires constant steering. Cruising speed - 120-130 km / h. Driving faster is tiresome, although if you believe the speedometer, then in the conditions of the landfill you can accelerate to 190 km / h, but you should not believe it, even the manufacturer himself claims a maximum speed of 175 km / h. So the speedometer optimistically overestimates the readings by 10-12%.

But on the off-road, despite the road winter tires, thanks to the high-torque engine, you can confidently crawl through very serious obstacles and plow the virgin snow.

Oddly enough, the VW Amarok, despite the lower power and torque figures, does not lag behind. We start the engine, put the selector in Drive mode - and let's go. The machine smoothly goes over the ranges, and for the sake of fuel economy seeks to switch to higher ranges in advance. If you drown the gas pedal "to the floor", jolts begin to be felt when shifting "up". A pickup truck joins the city traffic without any problems. Despite its immodest dimensions, the car is quite easy to drive and fits into the chaos of Moscow traffic jams.

The impressions on the track are brighter and more positive. For example, you can switch the automatic gearbox to sport mode, then the acceleration dynamics will become significantly better. The two top gears are not used at all at permitted speeds of up to 110 km / h. The top speed of 179 km / h is also higher than the Ranger. The claimed acceleration to 100 km / h differs by the elusive 10.5 s-10.9 s for the Amarok versus 10.4 s for the Ranger.

As for handling, the Amarok with a manual transmission was one of the best in the class in this discipline, and the suspension with small leaf springs only added stability when driving at high speeds and comfort in normal mode. Snowfalls in Moscow also helped to evaluate the permanent all-wheel drive transmission.

In reality, the car behaves predictably on almost any surface. True, the stabilization system, when trying to fool around on the ice, pacifies the ardor of the driver, "strangling" the engine. The comfortable rear suspension with three-leaf springs also owes its merit to such reliable behavior. Even an empty car does not "goat", allowing you to overcome our "directions" with a relatively high average speed.

It is difficult to imagine a Russian buyer who will really load a pickup truck to the fullest. Therefore, such a suspension is the most reasonable choice. But the lack of a downshift is alarming. It is clear that few Amarok owners with automatic transmissions will climb serious off-road conditions, but if something happens ... No, the car copes well with medium-weight off-roads, confidently climbing a slippery slope in first gear in “manual” mode. And traction cross-country ability in relatively deep snow is enough. Thanks to the "short" first gear and intelligently tuned electronics, which, when the Off Road button is pressed, effectively simulates the differential locks and puts the ABS in "off-road" mode.

It remains to report only the fuel consumption. Under the same conditions, the Ranger spends 1.5-2 l / 100 km more. This is to be expected given the engine size.

Of course, they can object to me that there is a 2.2-liter 150-horsepower version with an automatic transmission in the Ford lineup, and that would be a more correct comparison, but ... This version is much cheaper and obviously loses to VW in terms of traction characteristics. Therefore, the real choice remains only between the top-end versions of the Volkswagen Amarok and the Ford Ranger.

Compare VW Amarok and Ford Ranger

Volkswagen amarok
2.0 (163 HP) 6MT, price 1,480,000 rubles.
Ford ranger
2.5 (143 hp) 5АT, price 1 211 500 rubles.

Those wishing to purchase a relatively simple and utilitarian pickup truck, until recently, had little choice. Among the pitiful number of trucks officially supplied to Russia, only the Ford Ranger / Mazda BT-50, Nissan NP300 and a couple of "Chinese" were suitable for the role of ordinary hard workers. Recently, a newcomer from VW burst into this quiet backwater noisily, setting new standards for ergonomics and comfort in the "work" segment. Does old-timer Ford have any counter-arguments against the young and assertive Amarok?

Anticipating the bewilderment of the readers regarding the selection of "duelists", we will decipher the concept of the test from the very start. First, the Ranger had to face off against the heavier Amarok, as these vehicles are positioned as workhorses, while the Mitsubishi L200 and Nissan Navara are more for outdoor activities. Secondly - and this, perhaps, was the main determining factor - it was very interesting to compare the "middle-aged" and "new". Marketers have imposed on the consumer the opinion that the car that has just appeared is a priori the best. So let's check if the pickup, which debuted in 2006, will lose to "fresh" in one goal. The anatomy of our heroes is about the same: diesel engines, frame structure, rear leaf spring suspension and rigid connection of the front axle. We got the Ranger in the top-end Limited version worth 1,211,500 rubles, and the Amarok - performed by Highline. Such a dude will cost 1,480,000 rubles. By the way, the VW test has an optional Comfort suspension, which means three springs per wheel instead of five on the Heavy Duty variant. The price to pay for this is to reduce the carrying capacity by 230 kg.

Classic and Burger

Ford Ranger is a dandy farmer! In 2010, at the end of its life cycle, the second generation of the pickup went through the procedure of light "rejuvenation" and received a useful option - a five-speed automatic, which was lacking for more comfortable driving. In a functional Ford cabin, you can feel the age of the car, but the bowels of the truck don't get any worse from this. Among the innovations is only the automatic selector and the small knob for connecting the all-wheel drive and engaging the downshift, which has replaced the RK control lever on this version. To find the smallest fit, you will have to pull the locking levers for a longer time: the floor is high, so you have to sit with your legs outstretched, and the steering wheel is not adjustable for departure. But the driver's seat is tailored very well - there is a lumbar support and quite sane lateral support. The only pity is that it is located very close to the floor and is not adjustable in height. Hired workers should obviously be driving behind. Climbing the second row is inconvenient due to the narrow doorway. But there is a margin of legroom for a medium-sized person. Some discomfort will be felt by those passengers whom nature has awarded with a height of 190 cm and above.

Ranger's opponent is a real German. Cold Nordic design, where there are no random lines and decisions, aggressive, with a clear hint of the fighting nature of the "face". The stern is American, a bit like full-size trucks like the Dodge Ram with ruby \u200b\u200brectangles of lights and a massive curved bumper. From the ergonomics of the driver's seat, it takes a shock. It is so emasculated, as if it was not created by man, but by a higher mind, which does not make mistakes in principle. The general architecture of the dashboard and the design of the dashboard are truly Volkswagen, without five minutes they are cars: on top - a multimedia screen, on the bottom - a separate climate control unit, superbly readable instrumentation. The “pilot's” seat is adjustable in a wide range, and the position of the rudder can be adjusted not only by tilt, but also by reach. Interestingly, the landing and the overall impression of the Amarok bowels is more of a crossover than a "cargo" one. The amenities are extraordinary! But, alas, this introduces dissonance to the perception of the car. Is this an overgrown golf or an immature Touareg? Where is the gruff personality that a real truck must have? However, the feature that annoyed the author-pikapoluba will turn into an advantage for ordinary users who gravitate towards "civilization". On the second row of seats - expanse, and the width is enough for three. In terms of the volume of the cargo platform, VW beats Ford, and the Ranger has a higher carrying capacity - 1069 kg. Amarok with "comfortable" suspension will carry "only" 663 kg.

Volkswagen amarok

The four-wheel drive versions of the Amarok are equipped with two types of transmissions: shiftable and permanent, both called 4Motion. Unfortunately, the permanent version, equipped with a center self-locking asymmetric (40:60) differential, is not yet supplied to Russia. The test sample was equipped with a shiftable drive.

Simple symmetrical differentials (D) are installed in the front and rear axles. The driver can forcibly block the rear axle differential (P) - for this there is a button located to the right of the gear lever. The keys located to the left of the gearbox lever are responsible for connecting the front wheels and activating the downshift (PP) in the transfer case. When driving on dry asphalt, the manufacturer does not recommend using all-wheel drive modes - due to the resulting loads, one of the transmission elements can fail. The driver of the Amarok can improve the off-road performance of the vehicle by deactivating Dynamic Stability Control. In addition, there is an Off-Road function, which makes it easier to move outside the asphalt

Sides of the medal

Volkswagen's brainchild is a real ... crossover. This is largely due to the "short" and precise steering mechanism (three turns), excellent sound insulation. The suspension is comfortable and tight, with almost no vertical vibrations. And the big man is quite playful. And that from the spot (the first two transfers are very short), that on the move. Newtonmeters are especially felt when accelerating from 80 km / h in fourth gear. At the rearrangement, the "German", not heeling much, shows a higher speed than a truck with Mazda roots. Perhaps the only drop of tar in the "leggings" test is the biting steering wheel. The brake pedal is informative. If the driver has any complaints about the efficiency of deceleration, then he is a real "pilot", and he should change VW for Lancer Evo. The overall driving experience brings the Amarok closer to the Touareg! In general, the car would be harmonious, if not for the annoying "jambs". The two-liter diesel with two turbochargers develops a solid 400 Nm in the too narrow range of 1500-2000 rpm. Below, there is an obvious failure of traction, so active gas pads are required at the start. The clutch engages approximately in the first half of the pedal travel, and the discs close sharply. "Quit and go", as on the Nissan NP300, will not work: it is necessary to jerk the pedal a little harder or not push the tachometer arrow to the "moment" sector, and the black handsome man shamefully stalls. Not a diesel one!

Do you want to be the helmsman of a real men's truck? Contact Ranger! Diesel rattles and vibrations are felt both by the ear and by the gut. The engine is fighting, provocatively spinning almost to the red zone with practically no decrease in the acceleration rate. When empty, the pickup does not hesitate to shake riders on bumps, "kicks" with an empty body: the amplitude of vertical vibrations is higher than VW. The steering wheel makes four turns from lock to lock, and the feedback from the steered wheels is not as transparent here as in the "German". However, you cannot call it uninformative: the pickup holds a straight line very well and even at speeds over 100 km / h feels calm, which is convenient for long highway runs. And in turns, although the "long" steering wheel almost forces you to wind up on it, Ford behaves calmly and calmly, quite accurately following the driver's commands. The tightly knocked down energy-intensive suspension contributes to the speed of the execution of our usual "rearrangement" maneuver, however, the downside of its help is in the early "choice" of travel. The feeling of permissiveness is deceiving: if the corridor between the cones is attacked more violently, the pickup will begin to lift up the inner rear wheel. Brakes require unwavering confidence in their performance. The pedal travel is considerable, and at first it seems like Ford is slowing down reluctantly. But the simulation of an emergency situation in civilian mode - we are still not complete thugs to rush headlong on trucks - puts everything in its place: the Ranger stops even faster than you expect.

Ford ranger

The power unit of the Ford Ranger is located longitudinally at the front. A simple symmetrical differential (D) is installed between the front wheels, and a symmetrical self-locking differential (STD) between the rear wheels. There is no center differential, so the front axle is connected rigidly. There are three transmission modes that the driver can select using a toggle switch located on the center tunnel below the automatic transmission selector. In 2H mode, only the rear wheels are driving, when the 4H program is selected, the front wheels are connected, and when the selector is switched to 4L mode, a downshift (PP) is activated in the transfer case. There are no other drive controls on the automatic version of the Ford Ranger. Recall that the manufacturer does not recommend abusing the 4H and 4L modes when driving on dry asphalt: due to the resulting overloads, one of the transmission elements may fail. For a confident descent from the mountain, we recommend using program "1" - then the automatic transmission will always be in first gear, and there will be no switching to higher steps.

Geometry in the mud

Average off-road is not a problem for our heroes. Both have proven this more than once in previous tests and in travel. And what if the off-road turns out to be more serious than a rolled primer or a track in the snow? The underbody of the Ford is better prepared to deal with bumps. Vital elements - the sump, the transfer case and the gas tank - are covered with metal "armor". We found fault with the low-located rear axle gearbox, although it is powerful enough and will probably make contact with an obstacle. In terms of gaps, Ford beats Volkswagen: they are similar or more. But we would advise you to remove the sparkling arcs under the thresholds - a non-functional decoration of pure water, which spoils the geometric patency, it also remembers the threshold if something happens! The Amarok was upset by the low front protection. Well, at least it is not made as a solid "ski", but with thick runners. Worse at the "German" and the angles of entry, exit and ramp, and the latter, again, strongly limits the chrome step under the threshold. The dispenser is not protected, but it is not so easy to damage it, since it is pressed high under the belly of the car. But Volkswagen has a forced locking of the rear differential, and also has a "weapon" from the XXI century in store - the electronic Off-Road system. This function changes the algorithm of action of the electronic "assistants", and up to 30 km / h, the hill descent assist is activated. Ford has a self-block in the rear axle. Measurements for diagonal hanging were surprising: a relative of the Mazda BT-50 has it earlier.

What is closer to you?

So what, the new definitely won? By soulless points - yes, but by the totality of living impressions - parity. Both cars are decent, but they are designed for a different audience. You forgive the soul guy Ford Ranger for the poor ride and peculiar "cowboy" manners. Here I would also put a CB radio, tune in to the wave of truckers and communicate with "brothers", feeling a little involved in the harsh world of real "hardware". Emotions aside, this is an excellent, honest pickup truck that feels equally good both on country bumps and in a metropolis. Amarok is more modern, more spacious, more comfortable, but it is also not sinless. However, if the "bad" nature of the clutch and the peculiar character of the engine do not bother you, then you will like a good compromise between a hard worker and a comfortable SUV.

The results of geometric and weight measurements made by the editorial experts in the conditions of the auto-polygon
		Volkswagen amarok	Ford ranger
C	Clearance under the front axle in the center, mm	208	245
	Clearance under the front axle in the shoulder area, mm	213	231
	Clearance under the rear axle in the center, mm	211	205
	Clearance under the rear axle in the shoulder area, mm	242	244
D	Minimum clearance inside the base, mm	259	241
	Clearance under the frame or spar, mm	312	371
	Clearance under the fuel tank, mm	259	300
B1	Front passenger compartment width, mm	1480	1365
B2	Rear interior width, mm	1440	1370
B3	Width of loading platform min./max., Mm	1220/1620	1010/1395

Overall dimensions - manufacturer's data
* From R point (hip) to accelerator pedal
** The driver's seat is set to L 1 \u003d 950 mm from point R to the accelerator pedal, the rear seat is moved back to the end

Technical characteristics of cars
	Volkswagen amarok	Ford ranger
MAIN CHARACTERISTICS
Length, mm	5254	5080
Width, mm	1954	1788
Height, mm	1834	1762
Wheelbase, mm	3095	3000
Front / rear track, mm	1648/1644	1445/1440
Curb / full weight, kg	2157/2820	1926/2995
Maximum speed, km / h	181	158
Acceleration 0-100 km / h, s	11,1	14,7
Turning circle, m	13,0	12,6
FUEL CONSUMPTION
Urban cycle, l / 100 km	9,5	12,9
Country cycle, l / 100 km	6,9	9,0
Combined cycle, l / 100 km	7,9	10,4
Fuel / fuel tank volume, l	Dt / 80	Dt / 70
ENGINE
engine's type	Diesel	Diesel
Arrangement and number of cylinders	P4	P4
Working volume, cm 3	1968	2499
Power, kW / hp	163/120	143/105
at rpm	4000	3500
Torque, Nm	400	330
at rpm	1500–2000	1800
TRANSMISSION
Transmission	MKP6	AKP5
Reduction gear	2,480	2,020
CHASSIS
Front suspension	Independent, spring	Independent, torsion bar
Rear suspension	Dependent, spring	Dependent, spring
Steering gear	Rack	Screw nut
Brakes Front	Disc, ventilated	Disc, ventilated
Brakes Rear	Drum	Drum
Active safety equipment	ABS + ESP + Off-Road	ABS + EBD
Tire dimension *	255 / 55R19 (30 ") *	235 / 70R16 (29 ") *
MAINTENANCE COSTS
Approximate costs for the year and 20 thousand km, rubles	172 994	162 920
The calculation takes into account
The cost of the CASCO policy (experience from 7 years) **, rub.	105 600	92 350
Road tax in Moscow, rub.	6194	4290
Basic cost of maintenance ***, rub.	15 000	10 700
We stand. first oil change ***, rub.	7000	4000
Maintenance frequency, thousand km	15	15
Combined fuel costs, RUB	39 200	51 580
WARRANTY CONDITIONS
Warranty duration, years / thous. km	2 / no mileage limitation	2 / no mileage limitation
COST OF THE CAR
Test set ****, rub.	1 480 000	1 211 500
Basic equipment ****, rub.	1 059 300	861 000

* Outside diameter of tires is indicated in brackets
** Averaging based on data from two large insurance companies
*** Including consumables
**** At the time of preparation of the material, taking into account the current discounts

Expert assessments based on test results
Index	Max. score	Volkswagen amarok	Ford ranger
Body	25,0	18,1	15,8
Driver's seat	9,0	6,8	5,3
Seat behind the driver	7,0	5,6	5,0
Trunk	5,0	3,2	3,7
Safety	4,0	2,5	1,8
Ergonomics and comfort	25,0	19,8	17,1
Governing bodies	5,0	4,0	4,2
Devices	5,0	4,6	4,5
Climate control	4,0	2,9	2,2
Interior materials	1,0	0,9	0,6
Light and visibility	5,0	3,7	3,2
Options	5,0	3,7	2,4
Off-road qualities	20,0	13,7	15,0
Clearances	4,0	2,7	3,2
Corners	5,0	2,0	2,6
Articulation	3,0	2,5	2,3
Transmission	4,0	3,7	3,3
Security	2,0	1,3	1,8
Wheels	2,0	1,5	1,8
Expeditionary qualities	20,0	16,5	14,2
Controllability	3,0	2,2	2,1
Ride comfort	3,0	2,0	1,8
Accelerating dynamics	3,0	2,7	2,3
Fuel consumption (combined cycle)	3,0	3,0	2,7
Cruising on the highway	2,0	2,0	1,3
Lifting capacity	2,0	1,8	1,5
Length unfolded. trunk	2,0	0,8	0,5
Spare wheel	2,0	2,0	2,0
Costs	10,0	7,9	8,2
Price in test set	4,0	3,2	3,4
Operating costs	4,0	3,4	3,5
Resale prospects	2,0	1,3	1,3
Total	100,0	76,0	70,3

	Volkswagen amarok	Ford ranger
pros	Excellent handling and comfort level, an impressive off-road arsenal, excellent driver's seat ergonomics, roomy interior	Acceptable dynamics, functional interior, good behavior on asphalt, excellent readability of dimensions, real "masculine" style
Minuses	Clutch actuation takes some getting used to and skill. The motor lacks traction at the bottom. Low payload on the Comfort suspension version	Not the best acoustic comfort, poor ride, rustic interior design, specific fit
Verdict	A car with SUV potential, crossover comfort and a pickup body. Jack of all trades!	An unpretentious pickup truck, convenient for any operation and simply pleasant to talk to and stylish car

text: Asatur BISEMBIN
photo: Roman TARASENKO

I have no idea why a man needs a pickup truck in town. Let a minibus, minivan, whatever, just not a pickup. Where will you leave things? In the cockpit for everyone to see or in the back for the joy of a passing wiper? But for those who live outside the city, this car is more than relevant.

Volkswagen amarok Ford ranger

In the fall of 2012, at the International Pickup-2013 competition, the Ford Ranger took, leaving behind the Isuzu D-Max and. Moreover, the American pickup scored more points (47) than the owners of the second and third places taken together. It is difficult to argue with venerable experts (the jury includes representatives of almost three dozen countries), especially since they themselves are inconsistent - a couple of years before the appearance of the Ranger, they gave the first place to Amarok. But I'll try.

Dynamic test

The Ford Ranger made me afraid. No, it looks pretty decent, but when I drove off the country road onto the highway into the far lane, I was really scared. Making sure that there were no cars on the left and right, I pressed the gas pedal, but throughout the entire maneuver, the engine, as if having lost all compression, barely pulled the car to the desired side of the road, forcing those moving along it to blink the high beam. After getting on the right course, the pickup seemed to wake up and rush forward.

Further research into the habits of the Ranger with a 6-speed "automatic" and a 2.2-liter 150-horsepower turbodiesel suggested that they had saved fifty cents in vain and did not put a kick-down button under the electronic pedal, because without it the dynamics of an American pickup might not only before a nervous breakdown, but also before an accident.

Volkswagen with 2.0 biTDI 180 hp turned out to be as agile as a fighting rooster, although by name he is a wolf. Its 8-speed automatic transmission always knows what the driver wants when driving on the highway. The German model also has delays in reactions, but the "American" in this respect collects all the anti-awards in the world for his tight electronic mind.

And in dynamics Ford Ranger loses, which is not surprising, when 150 and 180 hp meet, as well as 375 and 420 Nm. Despite the smaller engine displacement, the two Amarok turbines are out of competition: according to the passport, the German car wins 1.7 seconds in acceleration from 0 to 100 km / h (10.9 versus 12.6 seconds). But according to the sensations, there is not much difference: at Volkswagen, it is compensated by the work of an “automatic”, which fervently clicks gears and reacts noticeably faster. Both boxes have manual controls and a sport mode, which allows you to drive not at the highest possible step for more intense acceleration. In the case of Ford, this is the preferred mode of highway travel.

Taxiing features

Both pickups handle superbly for their size and weight, and handle the steering like city crossovers. But the steering wheel seems empty and lifeless, while the Ford steering wheel is filled with a pleasant weight. Due to the design features of cars in the form of spring rear suspensions with continuous axles, driving on bumpy roads and speed bumps is not the most pleasant experience. On every bump, pickups bounce as if stung, ruts and cracks make the body squeak, and the driver actively steers, while every abrupt changeover maneuver turns into a hell of a roll, from which you look uh ... These are the features of all pickups, but Ford is stuffed with “safe »Slightly more electronics than VW: both cars have stabilization systems not only for the car, but also for the trailer, and the Ranger is additionally equipped with a roll-over prevention system.

But driving in traffic jams in both cars is a real pleasure. Excellent visibility, large "mugs" of side mirrors, comfortable seats that do not tire the back even on a long journey, and the Ford Ranger also has an electrically adjustable driver's seat, just like an "adult" SUV. In narrow yards, ultrasonic sensors and reversing cameras help maneuver and park, but this is easier on Volkswagen. Unlike the Ford, it also has front parking sensors and a rear-view camera with dynamic markings. The picture from the German's camera itself is larger, as it is displayed on the center console screen in a full 6.5-inch touchscreen monitor, and not in the rear-view mirror, as in the Ranger, but for me this fact is not so important - it is visible and visible.

When entering the track, there is immediately a lack of dynamics. As soon as you press the gas pedal to the floor, the pickups rush forward: Amarok - almost immediately, Ranger - after a little thought, but closer to 100 km / h, cars weighing more than two tons become lazy like walruses on land. You have to prepare in advance for overtaking trucks and slow-moving vehicles on the track, squeezing the accelerator all the way to the stop 10 seconds before the start of the lane change. During this time, anything can happen: either the car will be too close in the oncoming traffic, or the "six" will not stand behind, it will pull first "and overtake both you and the truck. In general, on long journeys, it is better not to experience illusions, but to come to terms with the unhurried pace of movement in advance.

If you're lucky and the road turns out to be empty, then the pickups will be able to accelerate to 170 km / h - it's almost not scary if you don't get a track or a hole. It is unrealistic to pierce the suspensions, but the steering wheel will have to be wielded with interest, along the way praying for the correct operation of the stabilization system. In terms of fuel consumption, cars, like Karpov and Kasparov, were a draw: on-board computers showed values \u200b\u200bbetween 11 and 12 liters of diesel fuel per 100 km. At the Ford Ranger, the plug-in front-wheel drive helps to save fuel, which is turned off as unnecessary in 2H mode. with "automatic", which relies only on the most powerful 2.0-liter 180-horsepower engine, equipped with permanent all-wheel drive. But eight gears of the gearbox can significantly save on the highway, since the engine speed is low even at high speed. From this point of view, the Amarok is preferable, because, whether it be ice or rain, the Volchara always pushes off the surface with all four "paws", while the "Wanderer" needs to turn on all-wheel drive with his own hand - this can be done at speeds up to 120 km / h, but in this case more diesel fuel will have to be shed.

Driving fun

Driving off the road is not scary. On the Ranger, you will have to select the all-wheel drive mode ahead of time, and if the tests ahead are serious, then you can turn on the downshift transmission row. The Amarok is not so simple. Its AKP8, which is unique for the class of pickups, lacks a lowering row, but Volkswagen assures that this is not necessary. The first gear is necessary for the car only for starting from a standstill or for driving off-road - then it imitates a "lowering". Permanent all-wheel drive with Torsen differential distributes 40% of the torque to the front wheels, the remaining 60% to the rear. This is in normal driving mode, and when conditions change, up to 60% of the traction can be applied to the front axle, and up to 80% to the rear axle.

Volkswagen is additionally equipped with a rear differential lock and Off Road mode, which are activated by buttons on the center tunnel. The latter activates a special off-road ABS mode, which allows the wheels to slip a little to warm up a bump in front of them for more effective braking. Electronic simulators of the front axle differential and the hill descent assist function are also activated.

The Ford Ranger has almost nothing to say against this: from its arsenal there is only a system of assistance when descending the mountain. It's hard to say how much the Volkswagen's power-to-weight ratio turns out to be steeper with road tires. More importantly, the Amarok has a couple of centimeters more than the "American": the ground clearance is 250 mm versus 229 mm. Both pickups have engine compartment protectors. Both of them move well over rough terrain at low speed - just release the pedal, and in the absence of steep climbs in front of the car, they themselves move forward neatly.

Weight taken!

Due to the peculiarities of spring pickups with loaded bodies, they jump on bumps much less, and the Amarok will be able to load more. Its cargo platform has dimensions of 1555x1620 mm, while the Ranger has similar parameters less - 1530x1456 mm. But the point is not even this, but the distance between the protrusions of the wheel arches: Ford loses to Volkswagen with a score of 1139 mm against 1222 mm. But the "American" by default is capable of taking on board up to 1152 kg of cargo, and for the "German" the base has a standard rear suspension with a carrying capacity of only 963 kg. The situation can be corrected by paying extra money for the performance of the Amarok Heavy Duty with an additional leaf spring and a carrying capacity of 1162 kg. The loading height of the Amarok is 780 mm, the same amount I intended with a ruler from Ford, the height of the sides of the cars is also the same - a little more than half a meter. The only thing I would refuse is the chrome arches on the body of both cars. They give the exterior an extra "wow" effect, but when loading any solid products, the glamorous chrome plating flies around as quickly as the leaves of an autumn tree.

Salon affairs

In terms of space for rear passengers, Ford and Volkswagen with double cabins are not inferior to each other. The Amarok is slightly wider at the shoulders due to the wider body, and in Ford there is a little more distance in the knees to the front seats, but both there and there these extra centimeters are unnecessary. It is more important that the seats, even at the back, are profiled correctly and do not tire, equipped with headrests and reclining backs.

Inside, the Ford Ranger looks much richer, the interior trim looks and feels more pleasant, besides, the Volkswagen Amarok cannot boast even the thoughtfulness of little things, which is familiar to the Germans. Yes, he has one more 12-volt outlet (the third "cigarette lighter" is hidden at the top of the central tunnel), but under the cover of the central armrest, the niche is half the size of the "Ranger", the glove compartment is so tiny that nothing can be put there except instructions and several A4 sheets, the steering wheel was equipped with buttons on only one side, and they decided to abandon the coolant temperature sensor altogether.

The undisputed advantage of the "German" is in his optional multimedia system RNS-510 with a full screen and clear logic of the control menu. A small Ford screen starts to take out the brain from the very first seconds of communication with it, but you can get used to this approach. If this succeeds, then he will not cause any problems, besides, Amarok navigation does not even know the central streets of Moscow, and Ford knows how to pave the way not only along a fast, economical and short route, but also taking into account the driver's preferences. What is annoying about Ford is the on-board computer, which is displayed in a monochrome dashboard screen and switched by pressing a button on it, which is wildly inconvenient.

… As usual, price decides everything. Ford Ranger in the Limited configuration with a 2.2-liter 150-horsepower turbodiesel and a 6-speed "automatic" will cost 1,587,000 rubles, and taking into account - 130,000 cheaper. Volkswagen Amarok with 2.0 biTDI biturbo with 180 hp and an 8-speed automatic transmission costs from 1,829,000. Our copy with advanced multimedia RNS-510, a plastic trunk of a cargo compartment on gas supports at the price of half a Lada Kalina (about 140,000 rubles) cost well over two million. And even a front-wheel drive 122-horsepower version with a manual transmission in the Highline version is estimated at a minimum of 1,604,200 rubles. For that kind of money, if you please: "Wolf" "Wanderer" is not a friend.

Ford Ranger 2.2 AKP6 Volkswagen Amarok 2.0 AKP8

Dimensions (mm) 5351x1850x1815 5181x1944x1834

Wheelbase (mm) 3220 3095

Ground clearance (mm) 229 250

Weight (kg) 2048 1996-2224

Slave. engine displacement (cm3) 2198 1968

Max. power (hp) 150 180

Max. twisting

moment (Nm) 375 420

Max. speed (km / h) 175 179

Acceleration 0-100 km / h (s) 12.6 10.9

Average consumption

fuel (l / 100 km) 10 8.3

Price from (rub.) 1,587,000 1,829,000

The Russian village is dead. Most Russians are sure of this. Meanwhile, agricultural production is growing, and Russia is becoming an increasingly significant player in the international food market. Pickup sales are also growing. Our trip in four pickups to the Tver region was supposed to answer the question: “Is there life on village? "

Ford ranger

Previously, there were two Ford Rangers: American and Thai. Since this year, Ford has only one mid-size pickup, and it's in front of you. In Russia, cars are available with a single and one-and-a-half cab and three engines to choose from: gasoline 2.5 (166 hp) and diesel 2.2 and 3.2 (150 and 200 hp). Gearboxes - 5-speed manual transmission for a gasoline car and 6-speed manual transmission and automatic transmission for a diesel engine. All cars are all-wheel drive. Our Ranger has a double cab, 6-speed automatic transmission and a 2.2 diesel. Prices: from 1,112,000 to 1,541,000 rubles.

Outside and inside

In America, the Ranger was never really a farm car, it is too small for that - you can't transport a bull in such a car. But surfers, crossmen and other outdoor enthusiasts overseas have always loved mid-size pickups. And the new Ranger does an excellent job of being the adrenaline-pumping chariot. Even a long wheelbase Stels ATV600GT ATV \u200b\u200bgot into the body! Body length - 1549 mm, width - 1560 mm. And how dashing an American pickup truck looks - a real star of a beach party - even if it's going to Thailand! But the interior turned out to be too "cartoonish" and not very comfortable. The support for resting the left leg walks with minimal pressure, and it is installed so inconveniently that it is more comfortable to just keep the leg on the floor. The multimedia system menu is confusing, and the control buttons are inconvenient. But there is a lot of space! You can comfortably sit behind you, which is not typical for a mid-size pickup. Still, the headroom for the rear passenger has increased by 5.5 cm.

In move

But the main changes are on the fly, because the Ranger has become much more modern and, as a result, more perfect. Thanks to the rack and pinion mechanism, the number of turns of the steering wheel from lock to lock has decreased from four to three, and the steering wheel finally has feedback. And it did not just appear: this handling is now more of a car than a truck. You can even joke! Moreover, the suspension has become softer, and the feed no longer jumps over bumps like crazy. And on slippery surfaces, confidence is given by the ESP, which is now "in the base".

But with a load in the back, it's better to forget about the dynamics. Silenok is not so much, the turbo lag is large, and the "automatic" is not too quick. As a result, on the way to the village of Verkhnyaya Troitsa, which is 280 km from Moscow, I had to carefully think over each overtaking. But the weight of the "quad" is 350 kg, what will happen with a larger load? In short, if you are carrying heavy loads, immediately grab the Wildcat version with the top 3.2 engine. But the suspension copes well with weights - there is almost no swing. The tailgate also did not disappoint, despite the fact that the rear wheels of the Stels stood almost on its edge: the side did not lead, and the hinges did not bent. In addition, the Ranger's body is fitted with lashing rails to securely attach virtually any size load.

Off-road "on geometry" Ranger gets a solid five. The angle of entry and exit is an impressive 28 degrees! The depth of the ford to be overcome is 80 cm! The rest are smoking nervously on the sidelines! But everything is spoiled by the lack of a rear differential lock, even as an option. It's good that you can turn on the lowering, and with the regulator near the gearbox lever forcibly block the interaxle clutch. With this in mind, and at the same time about the "quadric" in the back, we tried to avoid really serious off-road, but the Ranger coped with muddy roads without problems.

While the ATV weighing under 350 kg was in the back, everything was great. Slightly "blunt" automatic gearbox? Well, we're going with ballast! The steering is kind of indistinct and slack ?! So the "muzzle" is unloaded! The intricate logistics of the keys on the built-in radio tape recorder were not even particularly annoying. We're driving for a long distance in a truck! Caught one radio wave ?! So rejoice! But these were flowers. When the ATV was removed, the berries galloped, literally. Slowly, slowly overcoming the off-road, I still felt like a galloping devil on a spring that jumped out of the chest. And on a smooth highway, one got the impression that you were not in a car, but at the helm of a light aircraft, which, no, no, yes, and tossed aside by a stream of air. In general, I have a conflicting impression about the new Ranger.

Nissan navara

The Japanese pickup is delivered to us from Spain exclusively with four-wheel drive and a double cab, but there are two engines: diesel 2.5 and 3.0. The younger engine is aggregated with a 5-speed manual transmission and a 6-speed automatic transmission, and the power of the flagship engine is transmitted to the wheels through a 7-speed automatic transmission. Navara shares a platform with the Pathfinder SUV, but differs from it with a continuous axle with leaf springs instead of independent rear suspension. Price range: 1,296,000 - 1,876,000 rubles.

Outside and inside

Navara has always found itself between "proletarian" mid-size pickups and luxurious and powerful full-size trucks imported from overseas by gray dealers. The Spanish "Japanese" has always been more powerful, more luxurious, more prestigious and more expensive than other pickups officially presented on our market. It was Nissan who pioneered the segment of comfortable pickups, suitable for the everyday driving of the successful middle-class. A solid appearance, identical to the rather prestigious Pathfinder, rich equipment, a spacious salon - in this it is not a shame to drive up to a good restaurant or even a theater. Now that all the main competitors have gone through an update, the distance between Navara and the rest of his classmates has decreased, but still remains. Nissan is still more expensive and richer. Decent Bose music with a subwoofer, a large touch-screen display, a convenient navigation system, a scattering of buttons on the steering wheel - you can't tell right away that you are sitting in a pickup truck. Even the interior architecture itself seems to be written off from Infiniti!

The body of Navara is not the largest in the test, and this is easily explained, because the reserve of legroom for rear passengers is the largest in the quartet. Moreover, the upholstery of the driver's seats on the back is soft, so that even if the legs rest on the chair, then at least they do not hurt. But there are problems with geometry: the back of the sofa is too vertical, and the seat itself is set too low. Landing in the driver's seat personally suits me completely, but the adjustment ranges are small, and the seat itself is located high enough that it dictates a landing with bent legs. So I fully admit that there are many people who will find Nissan uncomfortable.

In move

Even the base Nissan engine is more powerful than the top VW and Toyota engines, so it's no surprise that the empty Navara feels almost like a supercar. It seems that you can even “make” some hot hatches at traffic lights. But the chassis, alas, is already inferior to younger competitors. Nissan is the only car in this test in which you can feel the movement of the rear axle. If you have experience driving frame vehicles with an axle at the rear, then there should be no problems, but those who are used to light reactions can be confused by the stern floating above the bridge. At high speeds, you often have to adjust the steering trajectory, but if you are familiar with a Land Cruiser or Tahoe, then there will be no problem. But, again, against the backdrop of the Ranger and Amarok, the Japanese pickup seems tough.

But the declared carrying capacity is 800 kg. It's just good if the body is the most compact in the quartet: 1511/1560 mm. Any "quadric" will fit into it in width, but our Stels did not fit in length. But it is most convenient to secure cargo in Nissan thanks to the proprietary C-Channel system, which consists of three rails located on the front and side walls of the body, and lugs that can be moved along these rails. With the load Nissan "softens", but the smoothness of the competition is still better. But the powerful engine of the "Japanese" does not seem to notice the load.

However, rigidity does not interfere with handling. Sure, the steering wheel is quite long and the feedback is not as good as in the Amarok or Ranger, but it is still easier and more enjoyable to corner on the Nissan than on the Toyota. Navara's off-road arsenal makes it a good "rogue": the classic plug-in all-wheel drive with a lowering range and locks for the center and rear axle differentials allows you to confidently cope even with fairly serious off-road conditions. In addition, during the recent restyling, the geometric cross-country ability of the car was improved. The approach angle is now 30 degrees (previously 29). Exit: until 24 (22). Kinks: up to 22 (18).

Vakhtang Koltsov, PR manager

A car for those who love comfort and - at the same time - are not afraid of off-road. A modern, fairly comfortable interior with a lot of options, the panel is literally stuffed with buttons and levers, the inclusion of downshifts is displayed on the joysticks. And there is even a fancy Bose speaker system, although the person who needs a pickup truck for work is unlikely to be so important the sound quality. However, the car confidently boosts deep clay puddles in low gears. On the road, the car gives the feeling of driving in a mid-size crossover, and the comfort setting makes you forget that this is a pickup.

Toyota Hilux

The most popular pickup truck in Africa and Asia finally came to Russia, where it immediately became one of the market leaders. The car is sold only with a double cab and four-wheel drive, but there are two engines: diesel 2.5 (144 hp) and 3.0 (171 hp). The first is available exclusively with a 5-speed "mechanics", the second - with an "automatic" with the same number of steps. Prices are in the range between 1,090,000 and 1,605,500 rubles. Our pickup is top-end with a three-liter engine.

Outside and inside

You look at the Hilux, look away and ... forget what it looks like. This has not happened with Japanese cars for a long time! You climb into the salon and ... am I really in a modern Japanese car? "Japanese" is true, but "modern" is problematic. Hard and cheap plastic is everywhere, the skin looks more like leatherette, the seats are very uncomfortable. So much so that my back soon begins to ache. The back cannot be placed upright, its profile is poor, lateral support is minimal and the skin is very slippery. The steering wheel is too low and there is not enough adjustment. Toyota is the only one in the test with four-wheel drive control assigned to a lever, rather than buttons or rotary knobs. Needless to say, the lever trembles like an aspen leaf in the wind?

Another disappointment was the music system. Not only does it sound bad and looks like it was bought at the Mitinsky radio market, but it also broke down on the way. At some point, the radio tape recorder stopped playing songs from flash drives and iPods. The sound just disappeared even though the songs were playing.

But the back seat is spacious, and the landing is almost no different from that in some mid-size SUV. Spacious and comfortable, because the back of the sofa is not in a pick-up style. You can only complain about the low position of the sofa, because of which the knees are too raised up. But this can only cause inconvenience on a very long journey. The cushion of the rear sofa can be raised, a couple of stashes are hiding under it, but the back is rigidly fixed.

In move

The empty Hilux seems to be the toughest car in the test. On the "speed bumps" there is a feeling that the rear suspension does not work at all! But this is only a sensation, because the Japanese pickup overcomes gentle irregularities unexpectedly gently, practically not inferior to our leader in terms of smoothness of the VW Amarok. True, as soon as an ATV was registered in the body, Toyota softened so much that its behavior began to resemble a ship: buildup and solid heels. But if you do not turn the steering wheel sharply, then on a long journey, the Hilux is very pleasant. The main thing is that on the road you rarely come across transverse waves of asphalt, or it can get seasick. But, again, on a good road, Toyota is a miracle! Regardless of the load, the driver feels the vibrations of the unsprung masses more strongly than in other pickups.

But there is nothing special to say about handling. On the one hand, the steering wheel is "longer" than VW and Ford, but still shorter than Nissan. On the other hand, it is "empty", and the poor location of the steering wheel itself discourages any desire to be active behind the wheel. The same "gray" and acceleration dynamics. It seems that there are no problems, but no matter how strong the impressions of the combination of a sufficiently powerful engine and an old "automatic machine" remain. Overtaking even with a load is much easier than Ford and VW, but Nissan is not sure.

Off-road, the Toyota driver feels less confident than the "steering" Amarok and Navara, because the rear differential lock is not available even for a surcharge. Moreover, cars with automatic transmission don't even have a self-block! In the arsenal of Hilux there is only a reduced range of transmissions. On a bumpy road with a load, you literally have to sneak, because because of the buildup, the quad-rik can damage the glass or the sides of the car.

In general, Hilux disappointed with its cargo capabilities. The eyes are located only on the floor of the body, and the loading platform itself is very narrow - not the widest Stels 800D ATV could hardly fit between the arches. Body dimensions: 1547 mm long and 1515 mm wide. Amarok is 10.5 cm narrower, which even includes a Euro pallet between the arches!

Vakhtang Koltsov, PR manager

Probably, the name Hilux speaks of "high luxury", but "luxury" can only be called a silver insert on the dashboard. In all other respects, this is an ordinary car, but this is precisely its beauty: it literally exudes confident reliability. Simplicity is not always a minus. In principle, this car resembles a Japanese foreign car of the mid-90s, where everything in the interior was made of monochrome gray plastic. A loaded car in its behavior is not much different from an empty one, it does not "goat", does not force the engine to spin up for acceleration and even slows down just as well. It is generally more pleasant to overcome irregularities with a load, since then the body, planted on the springs, does not jump. The inclusion of all sorts of "lowers" reminded UAZ, where nothing will work without crunch and squeak.

VW Amarok

The German manufacturer offers the largest number of versions of its pickup. Three types of transmission: rear-wheel drive, plug-in and permanent all-wheel drive. Two cab options: single and double. Two transmissions: 6-speed manual transmission and 8-speed automatic transmission. The 2013 model year cars will be equipped with three diesel engines: 122, 140 and 180 hp. from. There are also two versions of the suspension: with three- and five-leaf springs. Our 2012 Amarok has 163 horses under the hood.

Outside and inside

The austere Amarok turns out to be a real dandy: chrome roll bars and footrests, a beautiful body cover, chocolate inserts on the front panel and doors, chocolate leather seats - beauty! And while driving, you do not at all understand that you are in a utility truck - the landing is easy! The adjustment ranges are enormous, and the fit is no different from a passenger car. The interior itself is assembled from blocks familiar from the brand's passenger models. The rear seats are nearly as roomy as the Nissan, and the seat isn't too upright. The interior of the German pickup is the most elaborate in the quartet. There are most of all compartments for small items, three sockets at once, two large cup holders, an ashtray, into which it is convenient to throw garbage, and at the back sofa the backrest folds and the pillow rises. Bravo!

Unfortunately, the Amarok we inherited was equipped with a body lid that helps keep the load safe and sound, but does not make it possible to shove a "quad" into the body, so we did not manage to load VW solidly. Theoretically, there should be no problems with transportation, because the cargo platform of the "German" is the largest. Its dimensions are 1555 mm in length and 1620 mm in width. And the ride will be the most comfortable at the same time, because even an empty Amarok is comparable in smoothness to, say, a laden Nissan Navara.

In move

The feeling that you are in a car, and not in a pickup, does not leave even in motion. On the go, the Amarok is the most comfortable pickup in the test. Even with a completely empty body, the "goat" is almost not felt, and the energy intensity of the suspension is such that the "speed bumps" can be overcome if desired. VW's handling is also the best in the four. The steering wheel is "short" and informative, and the effort on it is the most natural. Amarok willingly dives into a turn, and no irregularities can knock it off its intended course. The clutch pedal travel turned out to be unexpectedly short for the VAG products, but the short-stroke manual transmission lever with clear gearshifts was not a surprise.

But not everything is so cloudless. VW's weakest point is the engine. Two liters is still too little for a pickup. Traction is desperately lacking, the engine starts to drive only after 1500 rpm, but by 2500 it is already sour. You have to switch frequently, which tires both the driver and the box. Amarok owners are complaining about broken synchronizers. Of course, there is a wonderful 8-speed "automatic", but with it the car loses the reduced transmission row and center differential lock, which the "mechanical" car is equipped with. Therefore, the buyer must choose: comfort or cross-country ability. If you chose a car with "mechanics", and even equipped it with an optional rear differential lock, then the cross-country ability becomes simply immense. The only limits are the geometric flotation and grip properties of standard tires.

Dmitry Kuzmin, Review Editor

In my opinion, the best suspension among all known pickups. The car not only withstands the load, but even with an empty body perfectly holds the road and fulfills bumps. The Germans "sharpened" their truck not under a brutal "dumb" dump truck, but with an eye to exploitation purely for "smart" commercial purposes. It turned out: a minimum of emotions, a maximum of modern technological solutions, electronic devices and everyday practicality.

SUMMARY

So VW won. It is closest to passenger cars, while it is very strong off-road, and its cargo platform is larger than the rest. Add to this the largest number of modifications and… VW is not the market leader! Moreover, the gap with Mitsubishi L200 and Toyota Hilux exceeds 20%. Most likely, the matter is in the absence of the "machine", which appeared at Amarok only recently. The trouble is that all the variety of versions does not allow you to create the perfect pickup. Our comfortable version tore the competition in a smooth ride, but the not much stiffer Ranger will be able to carry twice as much cargo on board! The Heavy Duty version makes VW almost as tough as Nissan. "Automatic" is good, but with automatic transmission "German" loses its off-road arsenal.

Ford and Nissan took the second-third places with a noticeable lag. Ford is almost as good as VW, but lags behind in dynamics and flotation. But only Ford offers a one-and-a-half cab, and the Ranger's declared carrying capacity is the highest in the class: more than 1136 kg!

Nissan is a bit old, but still good. It is the most dynamic, well-equipped and premium car. And he could have fought for victory if not for the loss in smoothness. The small body is also frustrating: it turns out that Navara is a city dude? Why would he need the best passability in the test?

Toyota lagged far behind and took last place, but in terms of sales of Hilux in the leaders, how so? By and large, the "Japanese" is seriously upsetting only with its narrow body and outdated interior. The rest is a decent average.

Well, the village ... Poverty, devastation, bad roads and at the same time stunning views, kind people and enthusiasts' attempts to breathe new life into the village economy. I would like to believe that the process of positive changes cannot be stopped.

Text: "Automobiles" magazine

Outside the window, it is still dark, the ice-crusty roads of the landfill are pristine - no tire tracks, no other marks of bustling life. But the balloonists are already waiting for us, they have their own priorities: the sooner we start, the less the wind will interfere, usually coming with the first rays of the sun. One pickup truck is already strapped to the ball as a two-ton safety ballast. The candidate is solid, although the oldest one compared to the other two Nissan Navar models (2.5 liters, 190 hp). But then it turns out that he does not have a rear towing eye ... We figured it out, but, frankly, they did not expect such a setup from a pickup.

"We usually pick up the balloon and take off in fifteen minutes." I look at the shapeless mountain of fabric and believe with difficulty. But then the fan rattled, meter-long flames cut through the twilight haze - it began! In a matter of minutes, the ball took shape and soared into the sky. We watched him go and turned to the other two pickups. The protagonist here, of course, is the brand new Ford Ranger (2.2 L, 150 HP). And the Volkswagen Amarok (2.0 l, 180 hp) should not be discounted. After all, he has not only a new diesel engine with a double supercharging, combined with an 8-speed automatic, but also a permanent all-wheel drive with a self-locking center differential "Torsen", as well as a suspension reoriented to greater comfort.

FOR THREE PERSONS

Aeronautics often use four-wheel drive pickups. True, as a rule, they prefer larger models from the American market, which are not officially sold in Russia. But maybe our "undersized" will do?

When such a tiny, against the background of a huge ball, the crew's basket is hoisted into the back of the Nissan, then you are convinced that it is not so small! The tailgate slams shut without problems (even the place remains), but putting something else here - say, a bag with a shell - is unlikely to work. Moving rails in the body do not help much, deep scratches remain on the unprotected floor.

The impressive "Amarok" with its simply bottomless body against the background of the rest (by the way, it is perfectly protected by plastic) suddenly finds itself out of business. The point is not so much in the uncomfortable cover that covers the cargo platform (for the purity of the experiment, it was dismantled), as in the stainless steel arches, one of which rests against the basket, not allowing to close the board.

Maybe a Ranger? This one, in spite of the tuning, is more practical, moreover, the floor and sides are better protected from scratches than those of the Nissan. The tailgate was closed, albeit with an interference fit (unlike the same "Navara").

But not a single car solved the main problem. Whatever one may say, but if you need to transport people, a balloon, a basket and other personal belongings, you will have to use all three pickup trucks.

RATIONALISM AND FUNCTIONALITY

Examining the rough interiors, you don't doubt their professional suitability for a second. In each of them there are sure to be impressive boxes, a rather big glove compartment, huge mugs of mirrors. In the maximum trim levels, leather seats, a dual-zone climate, rear-view cameras, parking sensors and almost indispensable navigation monitors appear.

Unusual, comfortable, spacious - this is how Ford is perceived. An additional plus - for sturdy seats in the front and rear.

Nevertheless, you immediately prioritize. We obviously like the Ford Ranger: bright instrument scales, a variety of colors and shades on the front panel - in a word, quite modern style. The seats are spacious, but with the necessary support and impressive adjustment ranges, by the way electric. It is immediately evident that the Ranger's ergonomics are at their best: everything is clear and at hand. One can only complain about the lack of longitudinal steering wheel adjustment and the ugly toggle switches for heated seats. They were clearly made in a country where such an option is not used in principle. A trifle, of course, but it catches the eye in a comfortable and spacious (including for passengers) cabin.

The Amarok is not the best this time, although Volkswagens are usually among the leaders when evaluating interiors. As if everything was in place, and they did not save on steering wheel adjustments, unlike Ford. I would like to praise the socket carefully installed at the top of the front panel - it's a dream of fans to connect additional equipment. But the driver's seat is still inferior to the Ford one, and not in size or range of adjustments, but in the ability to fix the body. From the "Amaroka" chair you periodically slide to the side. And behind, with a clear advantage in width, there is especially nowhere to put your legs.

And also visibility. It seems that Volkswagen has huge mirrors, well-tuned parking sensors, with which it is even more convenient to dock than with the help of the Ranger's video camera (where the image is displayed on the inner rear-view mirror is not the best solution). However, everything to the right of the driver is hiding in a huge blind spot. It takes a long time to adapt to this nuance.

Let's call it restrained classicism. Even if he is gloomy. But to be honest, the driver and passengers are not very comfortable in Navara.

The Nissan's age can no longer be hidden by updates. A modern display screen and a rear-view camera have been fitted to its panel, but the low-expressive interior of the Navara has not become more attractive from this. And although this simplicity is not particularly annoying, against the background of a bright Ford and cozy Amaroka, the Japanese pickup fails.

Even more disappointing are the flat and slippery seats, the modest ranges of their adjustments, especially the longitudinal ones. The steering wheel cannot be put in the correct position, the symbols on the toggle switches and buttons are small. Rear passengers also feel left out: they don't even have a seat, but a bench with a low cushion. And very tight at the knees.

LONG ROAD

How great it is when, having gone for new impressions, you can move so easily, especially without choosing the path. In the city and on a good road, Volkswagen strikes with its comfort. Soft, long-travel suspensions, unobtrusively distant engine rumbling. Almost "Tuareg", forgive for such an association.

But the brakes, or rather, the long-stroke pedal, are embarrassing: it falls out of the general harmony. Well, the eight-speed automatic is puzzling with the number of switches - it seems that by pressing the accelerator, you are giving the command not to the engine, but to the transmission.

The situation changes radically, as soon as the road becomes uneven, and the speedometer needle rises to 100 km / h. No, the motor is still great, and so is the drivetrain (and even the acoustic comfort). Just in the corners "Amarok" begins to scare the banks. To be fair, I will say: the four-wheel drive car holds up well for the road even in extreme situations. But the feeling of complete connection with her disappears. Behavior on undulating irregularities is also a big hindrance - as if the springs let the vertical swing, not withstanding the peculiarities of our roads. At the same time, the shock absorbers try to bring down the vibrations, but they also fail. The result is a bumpiness with large amplitudes, openly shaking out the soul. So Volkswagen is only for flat surfaces?

Here is the "Ranger", having shaken the crew well several times, immediately dotting the i's. This pickup gives rough and detailed information about all small and medium bumps. Here he is definitely a "leader". But with one optimistic amendment: the worse the road, the better the energy-intensive suspensions work, which perfectly cope with most pits and potholes. In these conditions you get tired of the shaking in it noticeably less than in Volkswagen.

Not the strongest Ford engine, in fact, turned out to be quite playful. It perfectly finds rapport with a 6-speed automatic, as a result of which the two-ton car jerks off. Only at high speed - when overtaking, for example, when it seems that there is still a reserve under the pedal - it suddenly becomes clear: the possibilities are exhausted. Similar in character and handling. The lack of heel and the accuracy of the reactions are mesmerizing, instilling confidence in the capabilities of the Ranger. With an increase in speed, especially on uneven corners, a pickup with the front axle disabled may unexpectedly jump out of the corner. Therefore, more often use sensitive (not like Volkswagen!) Brakes - do not bring the situation to a dangerous one.

Against the background of rivals, "Nissan Navar" seems to be unable to decide which side it is on. An excellent engine, powerful and torque, allowing you to accelerate quickly and smoothly. Logical 5-speed automatic, not puzzling with the feverishness of the work. It is a little noisy, however, in the cabin, and "extra" vibrations are noticeable. Even against the backdrop of the Ranger, not to mention the sleek Amarok. Mediocre brakes.

The "Nissan" has a too long automatic selector stroke and an original (with pressing) algorithm for engaging a downshift.

The handling is not as contagious as the Ranger, but calm and reliable. Although on the winding road "Navara" strives to fall out of the bend, requiring more and more steering angles. Even the ride smoothness of the Nissan seems good at first: the Navara's suspension perfectly swallows small irregularities. But on large ones, an unpleasant buildup appears. In a word, not the best final result.

So Amarok or Ranger? Automatic, permanent four-wheel drive, comfortable suspension characteristics, good isolation from noise and vibration. Even if you don't like something in particular, then in terms of aggregate "Amarok" is still ahead. Moreover, options for adjusting the suspensions are possible.

The Ford Ranger is deservedly second in this test, although in some ways (for example, in the convenience of the rear of the cockpit) it is preferable. And the price is tastier. Do not discount the Ford's better adaptability to bad roads.

Nissan Navara already lacks perfection by modern standards. Suspension settings, brakes, comfort for those sitting in the back - all this is time to change. So that, thanks to a successful motor, the model again played in full force in the main team.

UNDER LOAD

And how do they travel with the load? We take ... no, this time not an aeronautical basket, but a calibrated (600 kg) ballast.

Volkswagen Amarok. Oddly enough, the driver felt the increase in load primarily from the changed reactions to the gas pedal: its stroke seemed to increase. “Amarok” became much harder to start and accelerate. At the same time, the rolls in the corners and the tendency to heave were preserved. With the load, the amplitude of the oscillations increased, but they became smoother. Therefore, Volkswagen remained quite comfortable. And if you do not abuse the speed, then well manageable.

Ford Ranger. The rear suspension softened its hard temper, but the front one even more actively began to transfer microroughnesses to the steering wheel. I had to forget about comfort, at least on a bad road. But the rest of the "Ranger" did not lose driving qualities, remaining moderately fast and temperamental.

Nissan Navara. All of a sudden, the rear suspension sits on the stops, almost choosing a compression stroke. At the same time, the vertical swing increased significantly: the car began to "shoot" upward on any undulating unevenness.

MOROKA WITH AMAROK?

Two pickups in very close (including options) trim levels. Only slightly differing in power (180 and 163 hp) engines. To them automatic and manual transmissions. But at the same time, different suspensions and drive types. The second (brown) "Amarok" is more traditional (read: cheap). It is rear-wheel drive, with a rigidly connected front axle and a traditional, more muscular rear suspension.

They are different, it is immediately noticeable. Sitting in the latter, you more sharply feel the profile of the canvas. Tossing on bumps, especially small ones, is more pronounced. As a result, there is not even a hint of the vertical sway characteristic of a white car, which is softer. At the same time, the hard "Amarok" is not so uncomfortable, in an unloaded state it rather reminds of the serious energy intensity of the suspensions, especially the rear one. At the same time, it does not roll in fast turns, allowing you to more accurately control the car. Although the limiting capabilities of this version, of course, are worse and problems with handling begin earlier than in a pickup with permanent all-wheel drive.

Conclusion - the combination of a rigid suspension and a permanent all-wheel drive would be more profitable for the Amarok.

FROM PRINCES TO MUD

No extreme - an ordinary tractor track, although its size is more reminiscent of an airfield runway. Truly Russian scale! Finally, all reserves of transmissions are used.

Volkswagen Amarok. But it was not in vain that such a long-stroke accelerator pedal was made to him - the Amarok gracefully, like a battleship, floats through the endless expanses of mud. The main thing is not to forget to turn on the first, "power" gear in time. You can go on it like on a lowering row. The only "but" - because of the independence shown by the electronics, you feel the limit of possibilities much worse (do not accelerate, it will decide for itself whether it is necessary to pull). And do not forget that the reverse gear of the machine remains the most common in terms of traction limits, so the battleship moves back worse than it goes forward.

Ford Ranger. In terms of its capabilities, it is not inferior to Navara, except that it reacts more sharply to gas, requiring more accurate (sometimes jewelry) handling. The rest is just as confidently on the track. True, electronic locks sometimes do not interfere - rather, they are alarming.