Ural-4320 vs KrAZ-6510: specs side by side
Quick comparison from catalog data - no editorial review of this pair yet.
Ural · 1977–present
Ural-4320
- Power
- 132 kW179 PS
- Top speed
- -
- Kerb mass
- -
Photo: Henk Obee / Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 3.0
KrAZ · 1992
KrAZ-6510
- Power
- 170–176 kW231–239 PS
- Top speed
- 80 km/h
- Kerb mass
- 11,300 kg
Photo: Andrey Butko / Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 3.0
At a glance
Who suits what, worked out from the catalog figures of the versions above.
- Off-road Ural-4320 Drive and body: Multi-axle drive (6×6, 8×8…) · Truck vs Four-wheel drive (4×4) · Truck
In plain words
Ural-4320 is the older design (from 1977); KrAZ-6510 arrived in 1992. Ural-4320 is still in production; KrAZ-6510 is not. On the catalog figures, the Ural-4320 is the pick for off-road. Our catalog has no kerb mass for the Ural-4320 yet, so some checks above leave it out.
Full specifications
| Ural-4320 | KrAZ-6510 | |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Version | 11.2 YaMZ-236M2 · diesel · 132 kW (179 PS) | 14.9 YaMZ-238M2 · diesel |
| Production years | 1977–present | 1992 |
| Body | Truck | Truck |
| Class | Heavy truck | Heavy truck |
| Country | Soviet Union (USSR) | Ukraine |
| Performance | ||
| Power Why it matters: More power means stronger acceleration and easier overtaking, especially with a full load. | 132 kW (179 PS) 177 hp | 170–176 kW (231–239 PS) 228–236 hp Better |
| Power, all versions | 132–229 kW (179–311 PS) 177–307 hp | 170–176 kW (231–239 PS) 228–236 hp |
| Torque Why it matters: Torque is the pulling force you feel when accelerating from low revs, towing or climbing hills. | No data | 855 Nm 631 lb-ft |
| Top speed Why it matters: Top speed hints at how relaxed the car is at motorway speeds, even if you never reach it. | No data | 80 km/h 50 mph |
| Engine and transmission | ||
| Fuel | Diesel | Diesel |
| Engine | 11,150 cc · 6 cyl 11.2 l | 14,860 cc · 8 cyl 14.9 l |
| Engine code | YaMZ-236M2 | YaMZ-238M2 |
| Gearbox | No data | 5-speed manual |
| Drive | Multi-axle drive (6×6, 8×8…) | Four-wheel drive (4×4) |
| Dimensions and weight | ||
| Length | 7,366 mm 290.0 in | No data |
| Width | 2,500 mm 98.4 in | No data |
| Height | 2,715 mm 106.9 in | No data |
| Kerb weight Why it matters: A lighter car is usually more agile and uses less energy. | No data | 11,300 kg 24,912 lb |
| Fuel tank Why it matters: A larger tank means more distance between fuel stops. | No data | 165 l 43.6 gal US |
| Economy and running costs | ||
| Fuel consumption Why it matters: Lower consumption cuts running costs and CO₂ emissions on every trip. | No data | 33.0 l/100 km 7.1 mpg US |
| Fuel cost per year | No data | €8,170/year estimated |
| Range on a full tank | No data | 500 km 311 mi estimated |
These cars do not differ in the data we have.
Equal rows hidden (3): Body, Class, Fuel.
Better marks the stronger figure - only for measurable specs (power, torque, 0–100 km/h, consumption, boot, weight).
Estimated at 15,000 km a year with fuel at €1.65/l diesel.