Jump to content

Lunker777

Ford Ranger owners...

Recommended Posts

Hey everyone.... Well... Ive been doing some thinking and I think I need to start looking for a truck to go with the boat. I dont think putting a hitch on my grand am would be the best thing for me !

 

I just called about F-150s and aparently for a new reg. cab 150.. your looking at almost $600/mnth to LEASE !!!!! and even more to buy !

 

I can get into a ext. cab ranger for about the same money Im paying for my car today ! So thats more in the budget !

 

Just wanted some feedback from the Ranger owners on the forum... Likes, Dislikes, etc.

 

Also, would 4x4 be the best way to go ? or can I get away with 2wd

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only Ranger that gets 4x4 is the FX4 correct? I'm not a Ford fan, but the Ranger has been updated recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The only Ranger that gets 4x4 is the FX4 correct? I'm not a Ford fan, but the Ranger has been updated recently.

 

My buddy here at work has a 4x4 ranger... and I dont think it has FX4 on the side ? Ill go check haha

Ive gotten his input, but he's a little biased being as he is DIE hard ford.

I want some honest input ! haha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had four Rangers in my life, and have driven them all over North America without ever having any problems whatsoever. An extended cab model with 4x4, automatic transmission and a 4.0L engine will tow a 20-foot bass boat with no problem whatsoever. I think they're now rated to about 6,000 pounds towing capacity ... you can find the up-to-date info on Ford's website (www.ford.ca).

 

FX4 is one of several option groups available for 4x4 Rangers. It is not the only 4x4 model.

 

Ranger is a good truck that's relatively cheap to buy, cheap to insure, and cheap to drive. Costs about $60 - $65 to fill the tank, and on average you get about 500 km to empty. The 4x4 will go through anything, and the 4.0L engine is just about bullet-proof. Last one I had (a black 2005 extended cab 4x4) was the only domestic compact truck recommended by both Consumer Reports and Lemon-Aid (both said it has much better reliability and a lower cost to maintain than anything from GM or Chrysler. I never spend a cent on anything besides oil changes and worn-out tires.)

 

Spend the extra for 4x4 and upgrade tires - you will appreciate it on slippery ramps or any time it snows.

 

Likes: Great value for money, fun to drive, fairly easy on gas, never gets stuck, hauls just about anything, comfy seats, keeps its value well.

 

Dislikes: No heated seats (not even as an option), additional cost for cap or bed lid, extended cab doesn't have the tightest turning radius.

 

Overall: Reliability equal to Toyota or Nissan, but Ranger is costs less to buy, costs less to insure, and for the most part, Ford has had better financing rates than any of the Japanese automakers (I think my last Ranger was 1.9%, and Toyota was about 5.9% at the time). No-brainer, to me.

Edited by Craig_Ritchie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe Ford has 0% financing for 60mos. on all the Rangers right now. A few months ago it $3500 cash back. They got some good deals going on. Always heard good things about the Rangers. The Mazda's are the exact same truck but are approx. $3000 more. :dunno:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-some trouble with the 4.0 L engine - timing chain tensioner/valve train

-has not had a significant update in many years

-small cab - get the extended cab

-reliability? - do an internet search for Ford/Mazda truck forums and see what common problems are.

-may be able to get better deal by going between Ford and Mazda dealers as the B series Mazda is the same truck off the same line. Mazda may have different options available than Ford and vice versa.

-would also look into Nissan / Suzuki for similar reasons as Suzuki's new pick up is a re-badged Nissan.

-save up for a Toyota

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I own a 2000 ranger - two wheel drive, 3L engine. bought it 3 years ago with 50K km on it and now have about 110K on it. great litttle truck that pulls my crestliner 1750 fishawk with no problems. Recently I had to replace a number of front end suspension items to the tune of about $1500, but other than that no problems. I would definitely get the extended cab though - I didn,t and wish I did. When/if the time comes I would definitely consider another ranger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a 94 4X4 4L V6, fuel pump crapped out in it at about 100KM, but it had the good sense to do it in my driveway. A little hard on brakes and the extended cab seats aren't really good for sitting in, but the extended cab is almost a must just for your stuff.

 

Good on gas, great four wheeling and very reliable. I would buy another one I couldnt afford a full size truck

 

cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Get a toyota Truck enough said. Plus resale value will be amazing when the time comes

 

Not the info Im looking for :dunno: but thanks... Toyotas are to much $$$ .....AND If I could afford a Toyota... I would buy a Gm ... Enough said.

Edited by Lunker777

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, thanks for all the help people ! I just went to the dealer to talk to the sales person. Still not sure what Im going to do, but for what its worth, the ranger sounds like a pretty good deal.

 

I can get a 4x4 sport ext. cab.... pwr pack, cruise, tilt :blahblah1: for $20000 + tax

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

scarborough area dealers were selling 09 rangers 4x4 for around 17000, full size f-150 for 27000.

As for problems the 3.0lt and 4.0lt engines are good enough, have lots of ranger customers and there more than happy with there trucks.

the only drawback is the limited room and shallow cargo box, but most small trucks are this way

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I subcribe to Consumer's Report and you will NOT like what they say about the Ford Ranger. It has the LOWEST rating in it's class.

 

Ford Ranger

Ford Ranger

Tested version: extended cab Sport V6 (shown) Base MSRP price range:

$16,395 - $25,805

Price it Compare it

Highs

Compact dimensions, bed capacity.

Lows

Ride, handling, braking, noise, fuel economy, fit and finish, seat comfort, driving position, no side-curtain air bag or ESC.

 

Car Type: Compact pickup trucks

CR overall score

info What's this? 25Out of 100

Chart key

Highest

79

 

This model

25

Lowest

25

report card chart bottom

end-cap tab left Overview tab right

Ratings & Specs

 

Road Test

 

Reliability

 

Owner Satisfaction

 

Prices & Costs

 

Photos & Video

 

end-cap

CR Model Summary

Perhaps the only truly small truck still available, the dated Ranger (and its twin, the Mazda B4000) is behind the times. The rough 4.0-liter V6 isn't particularly powerful or efficient. Handling is reluctant, and when unloaded, the rear of the truck can step out on bumpy corners or washboard roads. The ride is stiff and snappy. Stopping distances are long. The narrow cabin is noisy inside and has rudimentary levels of comfort and fit and finish. Extended-cab models have two rear jump seats, useless for adults or child seats. The bed is useful-sized. No curtain air bags or ESC are available, but ESC will be standard for 2010.

See full road test

General Model Specs

Body styles

regular cab, extended cab

Drive wheels

Rear or part-time 4WD

Seating

3 front, 2 rear

Engines available

2.3-liter 4 (143 hp)

4.0-liter V6 (207 hp)

Transmissions available

5-speed automatic

5-speed manual

Warranty

Basic: 3/36

Powertrain: 5 year/ 60,000 mile

See complete specs

Recommended Alternatives

May we also suggest that you research these vehicles:

Toyota Tacoma Toyota Tacoma

Nissan Frontier Nissan Frontier

Honda Ridgeline Honda Ridgeline

 

 

Road Test

The Ford Ranger falls far short of modern pickup-truck standards. It's ungainly and stiff-riding; has a rough and noisy, inefficient engine; and a cramped, uncomfortable cabin. The interior is crudely finished. Compact dimensions and a usefully sized bed are the Ranger's only pluses. Even if you took thousands off its list price, the Ranger still would not be a bargain. This test applies to the virtually identical Mazda B4000 as well.

THE DRIVING EXPERIENCE

Ride comfort & noise: The ride is harsh and snappy. Common road bumps come through as hard slams and some impacts make the whole structure shake. Jitters and bounces follow you onto the highway. Noise sources abound from the rough engine, tires, and relentless wind.

 

Handling: The Ranger feels clumsy and requires lots of steering input from the driver when tackling turns. Body lean is not excessive, but the tires are quick to protest. When unloaded, the rear end kicks out easily over washboard roads and potholes. A 45-foot turning circle hampers maneuverability in tight spaces. Though it reached its cornering limits early and managed only a low speed through our avoidance maneuver, the Ranger proved ultimately secure. Electronic stability control could help, and will be standard for the 2010 model. In off-road situations the Ranger does the job, but limited suspension travel compromises traction.

 

Powertrain: A 207-hp, 4.0-liter V6 engine provides reasonably good performance overall, but its average fuel consumption of 16 mpg overall is not much better than that of much bigger, more powerful pickups. It's too bad that Ford doesn't offer one of the quieter, more modern, and less thirsty V6s it uses on other models. The Ranger was able to tow our 5,000-pound trailer up to 60 mph in 25.5 seconds, a decent performance. The five-speed automatic transmission shifts smoothly. The four-wheel drive is a part-time system only.

 

Braking: Fair overall, with long stops, especially on wet pavement.

 

Headlights: There is good forward illumination, but the pattern is very spotty and uneven.

 

INSIDE THE CABIN

Driving position: It's difficult to find a good driving position partly because the steering wheel doesn't adjust. Short drivers wanted to sit higher and had trouble reaching the pedals. Leg, knee, and head room are OK, but elbow and shoulder space are tight. The side and rear views are obscured by wide roof pillars, thick head restraints, and small windows.

 

Seat comfort and access: The Ranger's front seats are very firm, with long, flat cushions and little side support. Seat adjustments are limited to recline and fore/aft positions. A very narrow perch in the center of the front bench gives scant seating for three across. In the rear, the two tiny, center-facing jump seats are barely habitable and best left unused. Most found the running board got in the way more than it helped with access. There are useful grab handles on the inside front roof pillars. Rear reverse-opening doors can open once the front seat occupants remove their seatbelts. But since the two jump seats face inwards, they must be folded away in order to access the center area and then folded out again to seat someone.

 

Controls and gauges: The gauges are clear enough but pick up reflections and are partly blocked by the steering wheel. Most controls are simple, but the radio lacks a separate tuning knob. The climate system lacks versatility and there's no rear defroster.

 

Interior fit and finish: Interior features harken back to earlier times. The plastics are mostly hard and cheap-looking. Screw heads are exposed and the door panel flexes when you pull the door shut. The floor has loose plastic matting instead of carpeting.

 

Cabin storage and cargo room: The Ranger has moderate cabin storage, with a large compartment in the front center seatback armrest and open bins mounted on the center floor. The glove compartment and door pockets are small, and everything is downright no-frills basic. The cargo box is fairly commodious, and with the tailgate down the bed can support loads that are 7.5 feet long.

 

SAFETY NOTES

Safety belts: Front outboard safety belts have pretensioners. The center front position has a lap belt only. The occupant sensing system in the passenger's front seat detects if a small occupant, such as a child, is seated there and will disable the air bag for that position. The rear jump seats have no shoulder belts.

 

Air bags: Standard driver and passenger front-impact air bags.

 

Head restraints: Restraints for the outboard front seats are sufficiently tall. Rear and front-center seats lack restraints.

 

Crash-avoidance systems: Aside from antilock brakes, the Ford Ranger is not equipped with any advanced crash avoidance features.

 

Driving with kids: Rear-facing seats should never be installed in front. Front-facing seats can be secured in front passenger outboard position as long as the front seats are pushed back as far as possible from the air bag. Front-facing seats were also not secure in the center front position. There are two top-tether anchors at the base of the front passenger and center seats but the Ranger does not have any lower-LATCH anchors. Use of child seats in jump seats not allowed by child-seat manufacturers. There is no safe position for rear-facing seats.

 

RELIABILITY

We expect reliability to be average, according to our latest subscriber survey.

Tested model: 2009 Sport extended cab 4WD, 4.0-liter V6, 5-speed automatic

Major options: Limited slip, slding rear window, power equipment group.

Edited by Billy Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got a 99 Ford Ranger v6

 

Gas Guzler

Over 80 Kms an hour on a Gravel Road your life is in Danger

In the Winter, your life is in Danger

Oil Leak in Oil Pan at 90,000 Kms- Thats disgusting

Ive spent and Spent changing Sensors, 4 time and counting.

Low to the ground

Wheels slip on a bit of angle at a Launch site

 

ITS A FORD so I dont Trust it. Bought CAA just because of that fact.

 

Next truck would be a small Toyota, or Mazda 4 Cylinder. The Bigger Rangers are Fords, the smaller ones are Mazdas. Get the Mazda Engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have to buy a Ford, buy a used one. They don't hold their value, wonder why, and at least if you buy one with 100,000km on it, all the crap that will go wrong in the first couple of years has already gone wrong. You can get a 2005 or 2006 for under $10,000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have owned 2 rangers.....I had a 1988 XLT with a 2.9 and 5 speed....and I put 320,000 KM on when I sold it, and the guy that bought it off me put another 200,000 plus on it before he got rid of it. No major problems with it other that periodical maintenance and the like.....only thing I would have changed was to get extended cab.

 

I have a 2006 currently but will get to that after I comment on the following:

 

 

I subcribe to Consumer's Report and you will NOT like what they say about the Ford Ranger. It has the LOWEST rating in it's class.

 

 

Perhaps the only truly small truck still available, the dated Ranger (and its twin, the Mazda B4000) is behind the times. The rough 4.0-liter V6 isn't particularly powerful or efficient. Handling is reluctant, and when unloaded, the rear of the truck can step out on bumpy corners or washboard roads. The ride is stiff and snappy. Stopping distances are long. The narrow cabin is noisy inside and has rudimentary levels of comfort and fit and finish. Extended-cab models have two rear jump seats, useless for adults or child seats. The bed is useful-sized. No curtain air bags or ESC are available, but ESC will be standard for 2010.

RELIABILITY

We expect reliability to be average, according to our latest subscriber survey.

Tested model: 2009 Sport extended cab 4WD, 4.0-liter V6, 5-speed automatic

Major options: Limited slip, slding rear window, power equipment group.

 

 

The 4.0L engine....at least the one I have is not rough, and not underpowered (208 HP and 235Lb/ft tq) Handling on a truck is quite often reluctant and I have not driven a truck yet that did not want to step out on bumpy corners or washboard when it was unloaded. The brakes are good (but could be better). The cabin is narrow.....but it is a small truck. It is far from noisy inside (it is quieter than the 2001 Malibu my wife used to own), and the comfort of the interior and the fit and finish is far from rudimentary. I dont have the jump seats so cant comment.

 

Keep in mind that reviews are VERY subjective...at least in my opinion.....and...what are they comparing it to?? There is no other truck in this class on the market. There is NO comparison between a Ranger, and any other full sized truck out there...they are two different animals.

 

 

Got a 99 Ford Ranger v6

 

 

Next truck would be a small Toyota, or Mazda 4 Cylinder. The Bigger Rangers are Fords, the smaller ones are Mazdas. Get the Mazda Engine.

 

 

First off...Toyota does not make a small truck any more. The Mazda and the Ford are the SAME truck, only differences being cosmetic. All the engines in the Ranger/Mazda trucks are Ford engines (2.3l push rod engine, 3.0l V6 and the 4.0l V6) and the Mazda is not smaller than the Ranger. They come off the same assembly line.

 

Anyway....not here to start a peeing match.....

 

My Ranger is a 2006, with XLT level trim 4.0l engine, 5 speed manual, 3.55:1 limited slip rear differential. The seats are comfortable, the interior is quiet, and there are no rattles or squeaks from the interior components even in the cold (if the fit and finish were crap as stated in the review above I don't believe I could say what I just said about the interior). I have had no problems with it up until now (125,000 km) and don't foresee any in the future. It pulls my 16ft Tracker superguide with ease. If I were to change anything on it.....I would have gotten 4WD. The FX4 is not the only 4WD model......however the FX4 package comes with a few extras..I believe steering stabilizer, skid plates and a few other goodies.

The Ranger does NOT come with a bunch of options like the F150......so dont expect them.......however....I feel its a great truck for the money.....especially now......there are some good deals on. I can pick up the same truck today as I did almost 4 years ago, but add 4WD for almost the same price, financing is 0% over 60 months and they have job loss protection now I believe....in fact had I not gotten laid off and month and a half ago I would have had a new one already. The fuel economy with the 4.0L is about 11L/100km or about 24 MPG TOWING THE BOAT.......not the best but acceptable to me.....as for the 2.3L I am not sure.......but in my mind.....if I am buying a truck to do any sort of work with......a 4 cyl is out of the question.

 

Anyway.....those are my experiences and opinions and my opinions only.....I hope this helps with your decision and if you want to talk more feel free to send me a PM.

 

 

Bill

Edited by bassboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a 2006 currently but will get to that after I comment on the following:

 

Keep in mind that reviews are VERY subjective...at least in my opinion.....and...what are they comparing it to?? There is no other truck in this class on the market. There is NO comparison between a Ranger, and any other full sized truck out there...they are two different animals.

 

First off...Toyota does not make a small truck any more. The Mazda and the Ford are the SAME truck, only differences being cosmetic. All the engines in the Ranger/Mazda trucks are Ford engines (2.3l push rod engine, 3.0l V6 and the 4.0l V6) and the Mazda is not smaller than the Ranger. They come off the same assembly line.

 

The fuel economy with the 4.0L is about 11L/100km or about 24 MPG TOWING THE BOAT.......not the best but acceptable to me.....as for the 2.3L I am not sure.......but in my mind.....if I am buying a truck to do any sort of work with......a 4 cyl is out of the question.

 

Anyway.....those are my experiences and opinions and my opinions only.....I hope this helps with your decision and if you want to talk more feel free to send me a PM.

 

Bill

 

Bill it's nice to see you are enjoying your Ford Ranger but I have to call you on a few things you said as I quoted them above.

 

1) You stated the reviews from Consumer Reports is very subjective and that's just the point here. I would have to go with a NON OWNER who does this for a living rather than someone who is trying to convince someone else how good his/her truck is......

 

2) Toyota indeed makes a small truck it's called the "Tocoma" and it's earned the best truck in the small truck class, much unlike the Ranger that rated dead last. At the bottom I included a link for one.........

 

3) Sorry but I don't believe your Ranger is getting 24 miles to the GALLON towing the boat. That's even more then the EPA rating without towing the boat.

 

http://www.toyota.com/byt/pub/init.do?zipC...amp;x=0&y=0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The current Tacoma isn't a small truck, it's a mid sized at best.

 

The last small truck Toyota made was the '03 Tacoma.

 

Billy Bob: 24 MPG Imperial is more then believable. Imperial MPG's are not equal US MPG's.. 24IMP comes out to just under 20MPG US.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The current Tacoma isn't a small truck, it's a mid sized at best.

 

I have a 05 Tacoma TRD Sport and it is midsize truck, and it is by far the best truck I have ever owned. I had a Ranger and it sucked, I have also had 3 Chevy and 2 cost me more than they were worth.

If you want the quality and resale value invest in a good truck, not something that will lose 1/2 it's value when you drive it off the lot.

Good luck with your purchase either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well thank you all for the input... It really helped me out.

 

BUT..Last night he had called me gave me a price of $425/mnth over 60 mnths @0% ( I owe alot more on my car than its worth so thats where the higher payment comes into play) He was selling me the truck for $20000

 

So I asked if A-plan would help the price abit and he said he had to do some figuring and would give me a call back... Called back this morning and says that 0% is now off the truck... so that will make my payment REDICULOUS ! So I dont think I'll be getting a new truck for a while... Ill have to ask the father n'law to borrow his ride !

 

Thanks again for the help !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to hear that you were getting "Jerked" around by the salesman...........that's what's typically called "Low Balling" in the industry. There are many different forms of it but it basically means you are given a low ball price to keep you interested in the vehicle they have and you have shown some interest in. They expect you to get excited about the new car/truck and you have told friends and family you're getting a new ride because of this great deal you're getting. Then at the last minute they left something out of the price or they made a error on the figures, etc.......... then because the customer is so close to getting his new ride he agrees to pay the extra amount just so he can have it.

 

BTW this might have been a Blessing in disguise after reading the Consumer's Report on the Ford Ranger.

 

 

Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry to hear that you were getting "Jerked" around by the salesman...........that's what's typically called "Low Balling" in the industry. There are many different forms of it but it basically means you are given a low ball price to keep you interested in the vehicle they have and you have shown some interest in. They expect you to get excited about the new car/truck and you have told friends and family you're getting a new ride because of this great deal you're getting. Then at the last minute they left something out of the price or they made a error on the figures, etc.......... then because the customer is so close to getting his new ride he agrees to pay the extra amount just so he can have it.

 

BTW this might have been a Blessing in disguise after reading the Consumer's Report on the Ford Ranger.

 

 

Bob

 

I dont think he was low balling me, he knows I used to be in the business and that I know the tricks of the trade hahahah But I know they did have 0% for 60 months yesterday, I saw the paper. HE said they changed it this morning.

 

Oh well.... I even at the figures he gave me yesterday I wasn't planning on doing anything.... my insurance would go up almost $60 a month... so that right there was the decision maker for me !

Plus I think its a smarter move to drive my car till its paid off... that way I can start fresh and not have deficiency in my new loan !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...