Birdhunter1
Veteran Member
I plan on keeping mine till its dead and gone and parked out back with trees and weeds are growing up through it in multiple spots.
What's the general opinion on the Ford Rangers?
- Thread starter newbury
- Start date
- Views: 6108
RoyJackson
Rest in Peace
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2001
- Messages
- 23,144
- Location
- Bethel, Vermont
- Tractor
- John Deere 4052R Cab,, Deere 855D UTV, Z920A Zero Turn Mower and assorted implements
I've had three Rangers over the years All were 4x4 and manual transmission. Two were extended cabs, one a standard cab.The first was an inline 4...never another 4 cylinder!
I liked the other two a lot...especially the standard cab.
I'd definitely buy another, but I'd want a 6 banger and a 5 speed manual.
I liked the other two a lot...especially the standard cab.
I'd definitely buy another, but I'd want a 6 banger and a 5 speed manual.
Sysop
Elite Member
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2013
- Messages
- 3,301
- Location
- Fairmont, WV
- Tractor
- Mahindra 4035HST purchased 2013 - Husqvarna TS348-D purchased 2019 - Craftsman 42" HST purchased 2003
I've had two as well. A 1987 Standard Cab-Short Box 2.9L 5 speed, and a 2006 Extended Cab 4.0L 5 speed. I put over 200,000 miles on each of them in under 10 years and both were dandy trucks with lifespan left to spare.
I worked mine hard. Here it is towing my Lincoln on an 18' car hauler.
I worked mine hard. Here it is towing my Lincoln on an 18' car hauler.
Last edited:
rankrank1
Platinum Member
- Joined
- May 23, 2007
- Messages
- 749
- Location
- SW OH - near Dayton, OH
- Tractor
- 1978 Kubota L285, 1951 Farmall h, 1946 Farmall m, 1950 John Deere A, 1953 Ford NAA Golden Jubilee, 195? Ford 850, 1948 Case DC, 1948 Case SC
I do not blame your wife for not wanting to drive a dually. I would not want to drive one either as a daily driver.
That said, the all time worst vehicles I have ever driven in my life are: 1980's and 1990's Ford Escorts, Dodge pre-1994 D150 trucks, and 1980's and 1990's Ford Rangers. Luckily I did not own any of these vehicles but they were fleet owned and relatively new at the time. Rangers were a mixture of 4 cylinders and V-6's.
I have owned a few S-10's and while they drove okay especially compared to a Ranger; they were limited when it came to a truck use. Fuel economy was less than stellar. Maybe 20 mpg at best empty. Towing even light loads the truck is narrow and the trailer is always wider making it hard to see behind.
My 2 cents if you want an economical truck: Get a reg cab 150 truck of your favorite brand of choice with a V6 and you have something useful as a light truck, a light tow vehicle, and it will likely get better fuel economy than that little Ranger too. My strippy reg cab V6 1500 full size reg cab truck gets better mileage than any compact truck I ever drove and it is still on this place all these years later because it is still both useful and economical.
If you want a people hauler then get something like a Honda CRV as they will haul 4 people comfortably insead of those little sideways jump seats like a Ranger ext cab and easily get 31-33 mpg highway all day everyday compared to the 20 you might get in the Ranger with a tailwind and going downhill.
That said, the all time worst vehicles I have ever driven in my life are: 1980's and 1990's Ford Escorts, Dodge pre-1994 D150 trucks, and 1980's and 1990's Ford Rangers. Luckily I did not own any of these vehicles but they were fleet owned and relatively new at the time. Rangers were a mixture of 4 cylinders and V-6's.
I have owned a few S-10's and while they drove okay especially compared to a Ranger; they were limited when it came to a truck use. Fuel economy was less than stellar. Maybe 20 mpg at best empty. Towing even light loads the truck is narrow and the trailer is always wider making it hard to see behind.
My 2 cents if you want an economical truck: Get a reg cab 150 truck of your favorite brand of choice with a V6 and you have something useful as a light truck, a light tow vehicle, and it will likely get better fuel economy than that little Ranger too. My strippy reg cab V6 1500 full size reg cab truck gets better mileage than any compact truck I ever drove and it is still on this place all these years later because it is still both useful and economical.
If you want a people hauler then get something like a Honda CRV as they will haul 4 people comfortably insead of those little sideways jump seats like a Ranger ext cab and easily get 31-33 mpg highway all day everyday compared to the 20 you might get in the Ranger with a tailwind and going downhill.
OkieDave
Silver Member
The 2.3L engine is bulletproof, and more than sufficient as a runabout when paired with a standard transmission.
I miss my Rangers. They were fun.
I miss my Rangers. They were fun.
Scrambler82
Veteran Member
The Ramger was a great selling truck for Ford.
Ford did away with it because they needed the F150 sales to climb to make it look like everyone liked the new aluminum bodies but if it the only game, then your numbers are off.
I have owned three Rangers, one 1988, a 1995 and a 2003.
The 1988 had a 2.9 V6, the '95 had a 2.3 and the '03 has a 3.0, all engines ran well and the V6s gave me approximately 19 mpg and the 2.3 went to 24 mpg. My 2003, 3.0' which I still drive has given me up to 22 mpg, depending on how heavy my foot was.
I believe that Ford made a big mistake getting rid of the Ranger and talking about bringing it back as a Car/Truck Crossover, no frame, no really heavy duty parts and then saying it will compete with HD versions of other trucks.
I for one, a life long Ford buyer, would tell Ford, "If you bring the existing World Class ranger that looks like a warmed over Ford EDGE into this country, I will be off to either Dodge or Toyota to buy my next vehicle.
And... The new Ranger will probably be priced in at $40k, to keep the price in alignment with their larger brothers.
Ford has loss a few truck sales that I know of and I would have to believe more that I do not know of but I will be the next to leave.
Ford did away with it because they needed the F150 sales to climb to make it look like everyone liked the new aluminum bodies but if it the only game, then your numbers are off.
I have owned three Rangers, one 1988, a 1995 and a 2003.
The 1988 had a 2.9 V6, the '95 had a 2.3 and the '03 has a 3.0, all engines ran well and the V6s gave me approximately 19 mpg and the 2.3 went to 24 mpg. My 2003, 3.0' which I still drive has given me up to 22 mpg, depending on how heavy my foot was.
I believe that Ford made a big mistake getting rid of the Ranger and talking about bringing it back as a Car/Truck Crossover, no frame, no really heavy duty parts and then saying it will compete with HD versions of other trucks.
I for one, a life long Ford buyer, would tell Ford, "If you bring the existing World Class ranger that looks like a warmed over Ford EDGE into this country, I will be off to either Dodge or Toyota to buy my next vehicle.
And... The new Ranger will probably be priced in at $40k, to keep the price in alignment with their larger brothers.
Ford has loss a few truck sales that I know of and I would have to believe more that I do not know of but I will be the next to leave.
Clint S
Veteran Member
If snow is not in the cards (MS I am guessing so no) they are a decent little trunk. Like the others said though the ride is choppy, power is unimpressive and they can have a loss of traction in adverse conditions. For what you describe sounds like a winner though.
Sysop
Elite Member
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2013
- Messages
- 3,301
- Location
- Fairmont, WV
- Tractor
- Mahindra 4035HST purchased 2013 - Husqvarna TS348-D purchased 2019 - Craftsman 42" HST purchased 2003
The "global Ranger" is body on frame, same as other trucks. I've seen nothing that the new Ranger would be unibody construction.
Wagtail
Super Star Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2013
- Messages
- 12,681
- Location
- St Helens, Tasmania, Australia
- Tractor
- JD 4105 / JD Z355E (48" deck)
You bugger, Bruce... I gave a hearty laugh at that. :thumbsup:
The expression was made popular by the old "Rumpole of the Bailey" TV series (based on the books). You would've seen them broadcast on the PBS network in the US a number of years ago.
RalphVa
Super Member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2003
- Messages
- 7,885
- Location
- Charlottesville, VA, USA
- Tractor
- JD 2025R, previously Gravely 5650 & JD 4010 & JD 1025R
Worst small pickup we've owned among Dodge Rampage, 1996 Tacoma and present 2005 Tacoma.
The engine is about 1965-70 vintage Pinto with 2 spark plugs added to the head (4 cylinder).
Rides and handles as though there's no suspension system there. Ford forgot to engineer it.
Most expensive 50k tuneup on any vehicle. They broke off a couple spark plugs and had to replace the position indicator on the crank.
Best thing that happened was it got totaled in contest with a Ford Explorer. Got the 1996 Tacoma, which is our most favorite among the 4 pickups.
Ralph
The engine is about 1965-70 vintage Pinto with 2 spark plugs added to the head (4 cylinder).
Rides and handles as though there's no suspension system there. Ford forgot to engineer it.
Most expensive 50k tuneup on any vehicle. They broke off a couple spark plugs and had to replace the position indicator on the crank.
Best thing that happened was it got totaled in contest with a Ford Explorer. Got the 1996 Tacoma, which is our most favorite among the 4 pickups.
Ralph
