FordPetrol
Ranger Wildtrak EcoBlue 213
Annual energy cost · 15 000 km
2 523€
16,82 € / 100 km
Equivalent to 1 268 L of petrol 95 per year
- Weighted consumption
- 9,6 L/100km
- Fuel price
- 1,75 €/L
- Fuel used
- 1441,5 L per year
Consumption comparison
Same car, two powertrains. The simulator below calculates the gap based on your mileage and charging type.
Annual mileage
15 000 km/an
Simulated driving mix
Drag anywhere on the bar to adjust
Fuel price
Petrol 95 : 1,99 €/L·Diesel : 1,75 €/L
Typical annual usage : Mix 30% city / 50% road / 20% motorway
Annual energy cost · 15 000 km
16,82 € / 100 km
Equivalent to 1 268 L of petrol 95 per year
Annual energy cost · 15 000 km
13,83 € / 100 km
Equivalent to 1 042 L of petrol 95 per year
Ford Ranger EcoBlue 170 costs 449 €/an less in energy than Ford Ranger Wildtrak EcoBlue 213, over 15 000 km for this driving mix.
≈ 256 L of diesel saved per year
Cumulative projection by annual mileage. The cheaper-to-run vehicle widens the gap year after year.
1 year
449 €
≈ 226 L petrol 95
3 years
1 347 €
≈ 677 L petrol 95
5 years
2 244 €
≈ 1128 L petrol 95
10 years
4 489 €
≈ 2256 L petrol 95
Cumulative savings for Ford Ranger EcoBlue 170 versus Ford Ranger Wildtrak EcoBlue 213. Excluding purchase, insurance, maintenance and depreciation.
Projection over 15 000 km/year.
| Fuel | km/year | €/km | Annual cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Annual fuel1,75 €/L | 15 000 km | 0,168 €/km | 2 523 € |
| Fuel | km/year | €/km | Annual cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Annual fuel1,75 €/L | 15 000 km | 0,138 €/km | 2 074 € |
On a 100 km mixed trip, the Ford Ranger EcoBlue 170 is about 20% cheaper than the Ford Ranger Wildtrak EcoBlue 213 with default parameters. This ratio shifts with your actual energy prices — simulate for your profile.
The Ford Ranger EcoBlue 170 is cheaper across all distances with default rates. If your energy prices differ significantly, simulate to see the real impact on your budget.