Looks like we have to split the difference. A Ranger capacity is 1260 lbs (see the chart in this
link. The capacity is listed about 2/3rds-3/4 down the chart. BTW, 2004 was the oldest I could find with a capacity listing. My old Ranger was a '92 and had helper springs (didn't look aftermarket, but I did buy the truck used).
Why would you think any truck would have to share components with the F-250? The loads are based upon the design of the components. A 3/4 ton compact truck is still a 3/4 ton truck. And Ford used 3/4 ton components (still do, I guess) on the 4x4's since the trucks are expected to see more severe service.
I have to support the fact that there has never been a 3/4-ton Ranger. The designation of tonnage is a "nominal" one not a literal one. Much in the same way that a "2x4" board is not 2" by 4".
From
Wikipedia:
Full-size pickups in North America are sold in four size ranges - 1/2 Ton, 3/4 Ton, 1 Ton, and now 1 1/2 ton. These size ranges
originally indicated the maximum payload of the vehicle, however modern pickups can typically carry far more than that. For example, the 2006 model Ford F-150 (a "1/2 Ton" pickup) has a payload of between 1,400 lb (640 kg) and 3,060 lb (1,390 kg), depending on configuration. Likewise, the 2006 model F-350 (a "1 Ton" pickup) has a payload of between 4,000 lb (1,800 kg) and 5,800 lb (2,600 kg) depending on configuration.
The Ranger was simply considered a compact pickup (regardless of it's hauling capacity). To most people when you refer to a 3/4 ton pick up you are talking about a "full-sized" pick up. For Ford that would have been an F-250 designation. A 1-ton, capable of way more than a ton of weight is an F-350 and so on. His point is that the ranger shared no parts with the truck that was designated as a 3/4 ton pick up, the F-250.
Perhaps is just semantics, but I think you'll get this a lot if you refer to a ranger by it's hauling capacity of 3/4 of a ton. For the same reason I refer to my F-350 has a 1 ton, not a 2.9 ton.
Oh, and I vote use a trailer.
