Ford Ranger Forums banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
585 Posts
well that sucks, i was looking forword to buying a new ranger some day with a factory v8 in it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,321 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Me too... guess that won't happen anytime soon...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
583 Posts
Honestly, it is probably a good move in my opinion. Rangers never did get that good of gas mileage and fullsize trucks with twice the power and twice the capabilities get the same gas mileage I do in mine and I can't even haul a small enclosed trailer without worrying about blowing the trans up. I know my trans is on its way out, but I still wouldn't trust it with a healthy one. The used cost is just as much as a similar Silverado or F-150 so I don't see the point of buying a small little truck that really can't do anything truck wise when you can get a full size that gets similar fuel economy and does twice as much.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,321 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
I think the Rangers were a great truck for fleet purposes. I use to have a 99 Reg Cab Stepside 4cyl that got over 30mpg one time. Granted I kept the accelleration under 1500RPMS the ENTIRE tank (just wanted to see what would happen... LOL).

The 4cyl always have FAR better gas mileage than any other truck on the road (speaking of midsize and fullsize). Now when you get into the 6 cyl's, they totally sucked with MPG's.


I still think they should give it one more go and put the new 3.5L V6 with 30MPG's and 305HP in a Ranger... Might renew some interest...


I think what really killed the Ranger was Ford's fault. Granted they make more money with the sale of each F150, they totally stopped advertising the Ranger. I remeber back in the mid-90's, you couldn't watch TV without seeing a Ranger commercial. I could count on one hand how many I've seen in the past 10 years.

They have a monopoly in compact pickups. They're delivery is all wrong though... they advertise the truck as a little brother to the F150... they need to advertise the 4cyl's gas mileage a little more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
583 Posts
I had a 96 4-banger as well and it actually got only slightly better (like MAYBE 1.5-2 mpg). It was a lot more consistent though, harder to get bad gas mileage in. Maybe it had shitty fuel economy cuz of the shitty auto trans. Every 4-cyl truck needs a manual no matter what.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,686 Posts
wow alot could be said but i have to say i agree with ford on this the reason you will never see a stock v-8 ranger is the power to weight ratio. the same reason most companays stopped putting sticks in the trucks its leading to unsafe driving. how ever i would not buy a newer ranger even if i had the money and the reason is to mush techno bull **** imo. there making the wrong choice when they want to put all this computer bullshit in a ride its to easy to mess it up i want the good old days back less crap easy to fix straight forward mech and not to modern but thats just my to cents
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,321 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Oh yeah, I probably wouldnt buy a new Ranger either.


Good thing they sold millions of these things over the past 27 years... we should never see a short supply of them!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,411 Posts
Its sad but it had to happen sooner or later. I know we still have the Sport Trac but I hope they do go through with at least creating a mid sized truck that can hold a ecoboost I4, ecoboost V6, and maybe a nice 5.0.... wishful thinking i know!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,321 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
I bet they will just stick with the F150... already America's best selling truck and they make a huge profit off each one...
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top