Ural-Next vs KamAZ-4326: specs side by side
Quick comparison from catalog data - no editorial review of this pair yet.
Ural · 2015–present
Ural-Next
- Power
- 229 kW311 PS
Photo: Spielvogel For a gallery of some more of my uploaded pictures see: here. / Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0
KamAZ · 1995–present
KamAZ-4326
- Power
- 177 kW241 PS
Photo: Alexey8601 / Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0
In plain words
Ural-Next has more power: 229 kW (311 PS) against 177 kW (241 PS) for KamAZ-4326. KamAZ-4326 is the older design (from 1995); Ural-Next arrived in 2015.
Size and weight
| Ural-Next | KamAZ-4326 | |
|---|---|---|
| Height | 2,952 mm116.2 in | 3,395 mm133.7 in +443 mm +17.4 in +15.0% |
| Wheelbase | 4,755 mm187.2 in | 4,200 mm165.4 in −555 mm −21.9 in −11.7% |
| Fits a standard garage? | Too long and too wide | No data |
Difference vs Ural-Next (±). Garage check: a standard single garage takes a car up to about 5.0 m (16 ft 5 in) long and 1.9 m (6 ft 3 in) wide (width as listed in the catalog; some makers include the mirrors). Leave about 0.6 m (2 ft) to open the doors.
Full specifications
| Ural-Next | KamAZ-4326 | |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Version | 6.7 YaMZ-536 · diesel · 229 kW (311 PS) | 10.8 · 177 kW (241 PS) |
| Production years | 2015–present | 1995–present |
| Body | Truck | Truck |
| Class | Heavy truck | Heavy truck |
| Performance | ||
| Power Why it matters: More power means stronger acceleration and easier overtaking, especially with a full load. | 229 kW (311 PS) 307 hp Better | 177 kW (241 PS) 237 hp |
| Power, all versions | 177–230 kW (241–313 PS) 237–308 hp | 177 kW (241 PS) 237 hp |
| Engine and transmission | ||
| Fuel | Diesel | Diesel |
| Engine | 6,650 cc 6.7 l | 10,800 cc 10.8 l |
| Engine code | YaMZ-536 | No data |
| Dimensions and weight | ||
| Length | 9,000 mm 354.3 in | No data |
| Width | 2,259 mm 88.9 in | No data |
| Height | 2,952 mm 116.2 in | 3,395 mm 133.7 in |
| Wheelbase | 4,755 mm 187.2 in | 4,200 mm 165.4 in |
| Fuel tank Why it matters: A larger tank means more distance between fuel stops. | No data | 295 l 77.9 gal US |
| Economy and running costs | ||
| Fuel consumption Why it matters: Lower consumption cuts running costs and CO₂ emissions on every trip. | No data | 30.0 l/100 km 7.8 mpg US |
| Fuel cost per year | No data | €7,430/year estimated |
| Range on a full tank | No data | 983 km 611 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.