ATR 72-600 vs E175-E2
The E175-E2 leads, topping 5 of 7 compared metrics.
Put the ATR ATR 72-600 (introduced 2009) beside the Embraer Executive Jets E175-E2 (introduced 2024) and the trade-offs sharpen fast. Both are regional, which makes them natural cross-shopping rivals. The clearest separation between them is range, where the E175-E2 has the advantage. Below we compare them spec by spec, then break down which aircraft suits which mission.
6 more specs per aircraft — ceiling, climb, cabin, dimensions and more — are free with an account.
ATR 72-600 vs E175-E2: the key differences
- The E175-E2 delivers 150% more range (ATR 72-600: 825 nm; E175-E2: 2,060 nm).
- The E175-E2 delivers 71% more cruise speed (ATR 72-600: 275 kt; E175-E2: 470 kt).
- The E175-E2 delivers 15% more passenger capacity (ATR 72-600: 78 seats; E175-E2: 90 seats).
- The E175-E2 is the newer design (introduced 2024 versus 2009 for the ATR 72-600), a gap of 15 years that usually shows up in avionics, cabin systems and fuel burn.
- The E175-E2 is the larger aircraft by maximum takeoff weight (98,768 lbs versus 50,706 lbs), which typically buys more cabin and payload at the cost of higher trip economics.
Which mission suits which aircraft
The E175-E2 is the stronger fit for transcontinental missions — its 2,060 nm of range removes fuel stops on those legs. The ATR 72-600, at 825 nm, is better matched to short-haul and regional hops, where lower trip cost counts for more than outright reach. If most of your flying sits inside the ATR 72-600's range, the E175-E2's extra capability is range you pay to carry but rarely use.
Which should you choose?
On published specifications the E175-E2 leads on both range and cabin capacity, so it suits operators who want maximum mission flexibility from a single airframe. The ATR 72-600 can still be the smarter buy on acquisition cost, operating economics, runway performance, or current availability — the factors that rarely show up in a spec sheet. Our acquisition advisory team can model both against your actual mission profile before you commit.
More comparisons
ATR 72-600 vs E175-E2: FAQs
Which has the longer range, the ATR 72-600 or the E175-E2?
The E175-E2 has the longer published range — 2,060 nm versus 825 nm for the ATR 72-600.
Does the ATR 72-600 or E175-E2 seat more passengers?
The E175-E2 carries more passengers at maximum configuration — up to 90 seats, compared with 78 on the ATR 72-600.
Which is faster, the ATR 72-600 or the E175-E2?
The E175-E2 cruises faster, at 470 kt versus 275 kt for the ATR 72-600.
Which is newer, the ATR 72-600 or the E175-E2?
The E175-E2 is the newer design, introduced in 2024 versus 2009 for the ATR 72-600.
Is the ATR 72-600 or the E175-E2 the larger aircraft?
By maximum takeoff weight the E175-E2 is the larger aircraft — 98,768 lbs versus 50,706 lbs for the ATR 72-600.
Should I buy the ATR 72-600 or the E175-E2?
On published specifications the E175-E2 leads on both range and cabin capacity, so it suits operators who want maximum mission flexibility from a single airframe. The ATR 72-600 can still be the smarter buy on acquisition cost, operating economics, runway performance, or current availability — the factors that rarely show up in a spec sheet. Our acquisition advisory team can model both against your actual mission profile before you commit.
Still weighing up the ATR 72-600 vs E175-E2?
Specs only take you so far. Our advisors give an independent recommendation based on your mission, budget and how you actually fly — and represent your side through to purchase.