Changan Qiyuan E07 vs Ford Ranger vs Toyota Camry
Changan Qiyuan E07
$30,000
Ford Ranger
$42,500 – $43,200
Toyota Camry
$36,795
AI Comparison Summary
Comparing Changan Qiyuan E07 vs Ford Ranger vs Toyota Camry. Changan Qiyuan E07 offers the strongest value on price. Changan Qiyuan E07 leads on expert rating.
Category Winners
Overall Winner
Changan Qiyuan E07
Best Value
Changan Qiyuan E07
Fuel Economy
Changan Qiyuan E07
Performance
Changan Qiyuan E07
Visual Comparison
Category Radar
Price & Reviews
Model Year
Expert Rating
Changan Qiyuan E07
$30,000
Rating: 4.8/10
Ford Ranger
$42,500 – $43,200
Rating: 4.6/10
Toyota Camry
$36,795
Rating: 4.8/10
| Specification |
Changan Qiyuan E07 |
Ford Ranger |
Toyota Camry |
|---|---|---|---|
| Brand | Changan | Ford | Toyota |
| Model | Qiyuan E07 | Ranger | Camry |
| Year | 2025 | 2025 | 2025 |
| Type | Ev | — | — |
| Body Style | SUV / Deformable Pickup | Pickup Truck | Sedan |
| Current Price | $30,000 | $42,500 – $43,200 | $36,795 |
| MSRP | $30,000 | $43,200 | $36,795 |
| Dealer Price | $29,500 | $41,900 | $35,995 |
| Engine | BEV Dual Motor / REEV 1.5T Range Extender | 2.3L EcoBoost I4 Turbo | 2.5L Hybrid I4 |
| Horsepower | Up to 598 hp (Dual Motor BEV configuration) | 270 hp | 232 hp |
| Torque | Up to 645 Nm (BEV) / 637 Nm (REEV AWD) | 310 lb-ft | 163 lb-ft |
| 0–60 mph | Approx. 4.0 - 5.0 sec (0-100 km/h variant dependent) | 6.5 sec (0-60 mph) | 6.8 sec (0-60 mph) |
| Top Speed | 210 km/h | 112 mph | 112 mph |
| Fuel Type | Electric & Range-Extended Petrol (REEV) | Gasoline | Hybrid |
| Mileage / MPG | Up to 701 km CLTC (BEV) / 1,190 km combined CLTC (REEV) | 22 mpg combined | 46 mpg combined |
| Range (EV) | 230-245 km (REEV pure electric) / 551-701 km (BEV pure electric) | — | N/A |
| Emissions | 0 g/mi (BEV mode) | EPA compliant | Low |
| Battery | 39.06 kWh to 89.98 kWh options | — | Lithium-ion |
| Charging | DC Fast Charging & 6.6 kW AC Home Charging | — | Self-charging hybrid |
| Expert Rating | 4.8/10 | 4.6/10 | 4.8/10 |
| Community Reviews | 0 | 1120 | 0 |
| Performance Score | 9.2 | 8.5 | 8.8 |
| Comfort Score | 9.4 | 9.0 | 9.2 |
| Safety Score | 9.0 | 9.2 | 3.0 |
| Fuel Economy Score | 9.5 | 9.5 | 46 mpg combined |
| Technology Score | 9.6 | 8.8 | 8.8 |
| Value Score | 9.4 | 9.0 | 9.5 |
| Pros | Revolutionary deformable body layout switching between SUV and pickup utility; Choice of flexible pure electric (BEV) or... | Ultra-fast 800V DC charging; Distinctive retro-futuristic design; Spacious lounge-style interior; Strong standard safety... | Excellent fuel economy; Standard hybrid powertrain; Comfortable ride; High reliability; Strong safety features |
| Cons | Large physical footprint may require care in tight urban parking spaces; Brand availability varies heavily outside prima... | Ride can feel floaty on some roads; No frunk on all trims; Infotainment learning curve for some users; Real-world highwa... | No V6 option; Conservative styling; Limited sporty feel; Rear headroom slightly reduced |
