Good Bye Ranger

[Stolly113]

Good Bye Ranger...
I think this is a mistake on Fords part...


http://www.autoblog.com/2010/09/20/u-s-spec-ford-ranger-to-officially-end-production-in-2011-ford/

[Dirtyd0g]

First the crown vic now the ranger, huge mistake IMO. My ranger has been the most reliable machine ever.
Alan

[Gstang117]

BOOOO!!!
Even the POS looking-like-it-sat-in-water-for-3-years ranger I drove around for a time was reliable. Even if it didn't want to stop occasionally... but hey, brakes are overrated right?

[redfirepearlgt]

Owned two in my life. Bought both new. Both ran great. Not a problem ever with either one. Big mistake on Fords part IMO. Especailly when you are selling 75000 per year with minimal change since 93, which means little money spent in R/D or marketing to move 75000 units a year. Maybe with a little refresh and a drive train update that gets some MPG and adds HP/Torque they could sell 150,000+ per year, and drop the F150.

[Galaxie]

Local guy bought a 93 Ranger new drove it till 295,000 gave it to his brother he sold it with 322,000 on it and it was last scene 6 months back in Dayton still rolling . The same guy bought another new Ranger that now has 150,000 on it . The 93 had 1 clutch and a couple of timing belts and water pumps and that was it .

[cstreu1026]

You know I was considering buying a new ranger until I looked fuel economy numbers. A 4WD extended cab Rangers gets worse gas mileage than a crew cab 4x4 F150 with the ecoboost V6 that will tow 11,000+ pounds. Other than price why would anyone settle for a Ranger when you can get a far more funtional F150. Ford's biggest mistake is not having updated the truck in more decades. Even the 93+ up trucks aren't far removed from earlier versions.

[furiouslyfaster]

I would have rather seen them update the ranger to make it more like the Dakota, and Colorado. I think the lack of an update and the growth of the other two in it's class caused this. Maybe make like a spinoff of the Sport Trac idk. There is no doubt that rangers are good reliable little trucks my father-in-law had one forever and it ran like a champ and got you from point A to point B maybe not the fastest but it got you were u wanted to go.

[Stangman]

I love my black FX4 level 2... just did a tune up on it last night and now get like 21mpg's on 31" tires with 4.10 gears.... im a happy camper.

I agree with you Phillip... it just needs a slight update... we NEED the diesel quad cab from South America... id own one if it came in an FX4 lvl2 model

[cstreu1026]

That would definitely be way above average for fuel economy. The window sticker on the truck I just pulled up says 14 city 18 highway. Thats a 2011 supercab sport 4x4.

[Katmandu]

we NEED the diesel quad cab from South America... id own one if it came in an FX4 lvl2 modelx2.

It blows my mind why Car manufactures do not offer smaller Turbo-Diesels.

I know the main issue is meeting the extremely difficult EPA emission standards. If the EPA would loosen the strings a bit, maybe the manufactures would start offering Turbo-Diesels.

[Stangman]

That would definitely be way above average for fuel economy. The window sticker on the truck I just pulled up says 14 city 18 highway. Thats a 2011 supercab sport 4x4.

I think I made my truck more aerodynamic with the big ugly green truck cap I put on it... lol

[Blackout]

x2.

It blows my mind why Car manufactures do not offer smaller Turbo-Diesels.

I know the main issue is meeting the extremely difficult EPA emission standards. If the EPA would loosen the strings a bit, maybe the manufactures would start offering Turbo-Diesels.

I don't understand it also. I work at DMAX wich makes the Duramax diesel and we were supposed to get a 4 cyl. & 6 cyl. engine and they put them both on hold, im a nutshell scrapped the idea. The 6 cyl. was putting out 300 hp and 400 ft lbs. I thought that the power numbers were impressive. But, like I said...its put all on hold.

[pegasus]

i dont see why the wouldnt put that eco boost 4banger in it

[Gene]

x2.

It blows my mind why Car manufactures do not offer smaller Turbo-Diesels.

I know the main issue is meeting the extremely difficult EPA emission standards. If the EPA would loosen the strings a bit, maybe the manufactures would start offering Turbo-Diesels.

From what I understand, a lot of it is cost. Diesels are (currently) more expensive to produce, and they would drive the cost of many of the smaller cars/trucks up into the next class.

That being said, Chevrolet is going to be building a diesel Cruze for 2013...if that's successful in the marketplace hopefully we'll see more small diesels being offered.

[cstreu1026]

I believe Subaru will be entering the diesel market soon too.

[sean]

So does the u.s.a. Not get the cool cars because our government puts to many regulations on vehicles that may not be necessary? Are our safety, mpg, and emission rules making it more expensive to build and sell here?

[bestracing]

I don't understand it also. I work at DMAX wich makes the Duramax diesel and we were supposed to get a 4 cyl. & 6 cyl. engine and they put them both on hold, im a nutshell scrapped the idea. The 6 cyl. was putting out 300 hp and 400 ft lbs. I thought that the power numbers were impressive. But, like I said...its put all on hold.

Probably no future in it with the new emission/fuel economy standards that congress and Obama put into place. Once they develop a new motor or car it takes years to make the money back on the investment and I'm guessing the predicted longevity of that platform didn't meet the Bean Counters goals.

Damn Bean Counters!! :flipoff:


So does the u.s.a. Not get the cool cars because our government puts to many regulations on vehicles that may not be necessary? Are our safety, mpg, and emission rules making it more expensive to build and sell here?

YES!!

[sean]

such shit. I see cars on tokyo streets along with germany and australia and it makes me sick to see what they have as far as options to drive. They seem to be doing well. We have to many pussies in congress trying to please every one instead of just making good decisions based on the individual idea. To many speculators and tree huggers. Not to mention there are to many people who make a living out of filing law suits.

[Dirtyd0g]

I don't see how the 4x4 versions relate to the worth of these machines. For businesses to use for delivery machines they cannot be beat, The majority of the fleet of these trucks sold since 1983 are 4cyl, 5 spd 2wd trucks. I however am not big on daily driving a 4x4. If I need a 4x4 I'll go get a bronco II,explorer or even a jeep. Not a pickup truck. Large trucks being 4x4 for working makes sense, when you have to pull a bobcat or small backhoe you usually get into some mud, the 4x4 helps. The 4x4 on the rangers was fairly pointless and just a good way to destroy the fuel economy. My 4cyl is close to double factory torque after all my mods and built engine. It still gets 22mph with me driving it like I stole it, usually with 300+ lbs in the back. I did love my broncoII because it would go anywhere with several people in it, much better than walking through the mud to get down to the beach at foster dam. I will keep my ranger until I have to get rid of it, hopefully that day never comes. I wouldn't be surprised if my kids learn to drive in it.
Alan

[cstreu1026]

For me 4WD in a truck is a necessity...ok its more of a luxury but its a luxury I wouldn't do without. I'll be damned if I'll sit home through another big snow storm again when I could be skiing and there is no way in hell I would attempt a 75 mile drive through a snow storm in any 2WD pickup.

[Stangman]

That's pretty much why I bought my FX4 lvl2 packaged Ranger. I've had too many bad experiences in bad weather. I need something as sure footed as a mountain goat

[Dirtyd0g]

If the truck is truely 2wd and you have good tires plus some weight in the back you'll get 2x the mpg and drive through anything you need to. My truck is still my preferred machine in the snow, 2wd and all. You do have to drive with caution, but that is still the case with 4wd if you care about your life.
Alan

[setty2706]

well i hope my 264K ranger keeps on trucking because I think this is a big mistake... the ranger has been a Truck that had stated its value to the consumer

[BlazinEagle]

My wife and I bought her ranger new in 2004. It is an extended cab 4x4 and we have had great luck with it. Minor repairs here and there. She just tipped over 100k last week.

[Dirtyd0g]

Maybe they are getting rid of them because people keep them too long, I still don't see why they would remove the light duty fuel efficient pickup truck with fuel prices this high. parts stores going to have to use minivans I guess. that'll be an expensive mess. Worse on fuel too.
Alan

[Stangman]

Advance auto parts (atleast some) us HHR's and other small cars. When I used to work at Advance, I drove a 2wd 4cyl ranger, and just loved the truck... ran soo much better than the newer colorado's they had, and was a LOT more comfortable too sit in... colorado's with bench seats and non tilt columns were very odd to sit in, when you're 6ft tall

[Gstang117]

Oh god. The horrors of delievering parts in clown cars. It's all coming back to me.
Wait.. I still do that. NOOOOOOO!!

[Stangman]

Man, I loved that job. Close to home, decent (at the time) pay. Friendly shops.... I know what im gonna do when im 80... lol

[Gstang117]

Lol yea I can't really complain about it (except that damn catchphrase, I hear that *%@& from everyone) there's some really good shops around plus I get to drive creepily around dayton performance and check out the stangs on the lifts