2003 Dodge Ram Van 1500 vs 2014 Ford E250 Van
📊 Key Differences
- Fuel economy: 14 MPG vs 15 MPG combined — Ford E250 Van is more efficient
- Annual fuel cost: $4300 vs $4000 — Ford E250 Van saves $ per year
- Fuel type: Regular Gasoline vs Regular Gasoline
| Specification | 2003 Dodge Ram Van 1500 | 2014 Ford E250 Van |
|---|---|---|
| Year | 2003 | 2014 |
| Class | Vans, Cargo Type | Vans, Cargo Type |
| Fuel Type | Regular Gasoline | Regular Gasoline |
| Drive | Rear-Wheel Drive | Rear-Wheel Drive |
| Transmission | Automatic 3-spd | Automatic 4-spd |
| Cylinders | 6 | 8 |
| Displacement (L) | 3.9 | 4.6 |
| City MPG | 13 | 13 |
| Highway MPG | 15 | 16 |
| Combined MPG | 14 | 15 |
| Annual Fuel Cost | $4300 | $4000 |
| CO₂ (g/mile) | 634.7857142857143 | 607.0 |
| EPA Fuel Economy Score | —/10 | 2/10 |
| EPA GHG Score | —/10 | 2/10 |
🚗 2003 Dodge Ram Van 1500
Vans, Cargo Type with 14 MPG combined fuel economy. Runs on Regular Gasoline. Rear-Wheel Drive drivetrain.
Full Dodge Ram Van 1500 Profile →🚗 2014 Ford E250 Van
Vans, Cargo Type with 15 MPG combined fuel economy. Runs on Regular Gasoline. Rear-Wheel Drive drivetrain.
Full Ford E250 Van Profile →🔗 Related