Last production day of the Ford Ranger, St.Paul

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: andrewg
Originally Posted By: yaris0128
Its fords own fault the Ranger has failed in the last few years. While the rest of the small pickups upsized and adapted to the changing market the ranger didnt change at all. It has been the same truck for waaaay to many years. If they had a larger model similar to the Tacoma then maybe people would have bought it. I for one would have no interest in a compact truck that I cant do a lot with. My parents have a 2005 Tacoma 4dr and that thing is great! Decent mileage and seating for 5! The Ranger is the only one on the market that cant do that these days. Waste of time to buy one unless you want to get a weak 4cyl to attempt to get good mileage.

Exactly why many of us LIKE the Ranger. I didn't want or need a bigger, more complex, expensive pickup. I don't care what market Ford is pandering toward to get higher sales....that's fine and part of what drives sales. But Ford, and other auto makers often ignore the cost conscious and thrifty buyer that just wants VALUE and not trying to keep up with the 'cool' factor. If a person wants a larger, 'real' pickup...there has never been a shortage of that. But in the last fifteen years the available selections for a simple 4 cylinder, small, reliable pickup has all but evaporated....especially now with the end of the Ranger. And who wants to seat 5 people in a compact truck? What's the point? Buy a sedan for crying out loud. And you say a 'weak' 4 cylinder? Hardly. It's people such as yourself that have obliterated the ability to find true value in the pickup market by demanding size, volumes of power, and expensive updating.

X1000!! I love my Ranger and would never trade it for a bloated Tacoma or full-size.
 
Originally Posted By: yaris0128
Its fords own fault the Ranger has failed in the last few years. While the rest of the small pickups upsized and adapted to the changing market the ranger didnt change at all. It has been the same truck for waaaay to many years. If they had a larger model similar to the Tacoma then maybe people would have bought it. I for one would have no interest in a compact truck that I cant do a lot with. My parents have a 2005 Tacoma 4dr and that thing is great! Decent mileage and seating for 5! The Ranger is the only one on the market that cant do that these days. Waste of time to buy one unless you want to get a weak 4cyl to attempt to get good mileage.

If I wanted something larger than a Ranger, I'd just buy an F-150. A far better vehicle than the Tacoma for about the same price and fuel economy, but with a lot more power and room.

The Tacoma isn't much of a benchmark, aside from having better sales than it's competitors. The composite beds have been known to crack, there have been quality issues, and there's a history of severe rust that we don't know for sure has been corrected yet.

As for MPG, the Tacoma may be "good," but sorry, it does not come close to the Ranger. The Duratec 2.3 makes only a few less HP than the Tacoma's 2.7 in a lighter truck, allowing it to get over 30 MPG on the highway with a manual transmission and regular cab. Ford also offers a 5-speed auto with the I4 Ranger, while the Tacoma I4 gets a 4-speed. Payload and towing capacities are about the same between the two, the Ranger is just more efficient.

I don't need to carry five people around, so the Ranger does work well for me. I do quite a bit with it...commute to and from work, carry all kinds of power equipment around, haul ATVs around, etc. Any truck missing large chunks of the Line-X liner is getting used pretty good. That said, Ford does need to update the Ranger and offer a crew cab (already sold in Mexico and South America), but I think getting rid of it is a poor move. An updated version of what it already is would be a strong seller (it's still in 2nd or 3rd place). It's just much more important to Ford for the F-150 to be a strong seller and they seem to think getting rid of the Ranger will help that.
 
Originally Posted By: andrewg
Originally Posted By: yaris0128
Its fords own fault the Ranger has failed in the last few years. While the rest of the small pickups upsized and adapted to the changing market the ranger didnt change at all. It has been the same truck for waaaay to many years. If they had a larger model similar to the Tacoma then maybe people would have bought it. I for one would have no interest in a compact truck that I cant do a lot with. My parents have a 2005 Tacoma 4dr and that thing is great! Decent mileage and seating for 5! The Ranger is the only one on the market that cant do that these days. Waste of time to buy one unless you want to get a weak 4cyl to attempt to get good mileage.

Exactly why many of us LIKE the Ranger. I didn't want or need a bigger, more complex, expensive pickup. I don't care what market Ford is pandering toward to get higher sales....that's fine and part of what drives sales. But Ford, and other auto makers often ignore the cost conscious and thrifty buyer that just wants VALUE and not trying to keep up with the 'cool' factor. If a person wants a larger, 'real' pickup...there has never been a shortage of that. But in the last fifteen years the available selections for a simple 4 cylinder, small, reliable pickup has all but evaporated....especially now with the end of the Ranger. And who wants to seat 5 people in a compact truck? What's the point? Buy a sedan for crying out loud. And you say a 'weak' 4 cylinder? Hardly. It's people such as yourself that have obliterated the ability to find true value in the pickup market by demanding size, volumes of power, and expensive updating.
I like the Ford Ranger. My brother used to have an 86 STX and that was a really cool truck. I dont have the need to carry 5 people myself. When ever I go out to see my friends I will always take the del sol so I dont have to drive them around lol. And weak 4cyl you say? Im going to assume youve owned a 4cyl truck before? If your trying to actually haul stuff its a freaking joke. I had a 2.3L Mazda B-series and a late model S-10 for a work truck and if I had my daily garage door load on that truck you had to floor it just to get moving. MPG dropped down to under 20. I would never own a joke of a truck to use it as a legit truck. And theres still plenty of value in the compact trucks in the base model Tacoma and Colorado.
 
Originally Posted By: novadude
I really don't understand why domestic manufacturers are exiting the small truck market. Judging by the number of 10-15 yr old S10s and Rangers on the roads, it seems like there is a demand for a "right sized" pick-up. Not everyone needs a huge truck.


yeah but those people aren't going to buy a new truck. they will continue to drive old ranger and s10's. eventually they'll move on to used frontiers, tacoma's and V6 full size trucks. heck a short box single cab is as rare as a mini truck anymore. I read somewhere that single cabs are about 10 percent of what is made now. the extended cab and crew cab us just too useful

NO ONE BUYS THEM

but it is a pretty sad there won't be any new ranger. thy should jus figure out a business case to make a lot fewer rangers and make charde for them.
 
Last edited:
The Ford Ranger is alive and selling very well here. Just that it is made in Thailand now for this market. Still made in Brazil and Argentina, I think.

You are right though. It is a good, right-sized pickup. I had a 97 for about 220,000 miles or so and I still see the new owner with it 6 years later.
 
It's too bad Ford let the Ranger languish. The last one I drove was an 04, but it felt like it was a 74. It was loud, unrefined, cramped, and kind of unpleasant. It really seemed like some modern engineering could have transformed it but Ford put all their eggs into the full-size basket.
 
Originally Posted By: yaris0128
Originally Posted By: andrewg
Originally Posted By: yaris0128
Its fords own fault the Ranger has failed in the last few years. While the rest of the small pickups upsized and adapted to the changing market the ranger didnt change at all. It has been the same truck for waaaay to many years. If they had a larger model similar to the Tacoma then maybe people would have bought it. I for one would have no interest in a compact truck that I cant do a lot with. My parents have a 2005 Tacoma 4dr and that thing is great! Decent mileage and seating for 5! The Ranger is the only one on the market that cant do that these days. Waste of time to buy one unless you want to get a weak 4cyl to attempt to get good mileage.

Exactly why many of us LIKE the Ranger. I didn't want or need a bigger, more complex, expensive pickup. I don't care what market Ford is pandering toward to get higher sales....that's fine and part of what drives sales. But Ford, and other auto makers often ignore the cost conscious and thrifty buyer that just wants VALUE and not trying to keep up with the 'cool' factor. If a person wants a larger, 'real' pickup...there has never been a shortage of that. But in the last fifteen years the available selections for a simple 4 cylinder, small, reliable pickup has all but evaporated....especially now with the end of the Ranger. And who wants to seat 5 people in a compact truck? What's the point? Buy a sedan for crying out loud. And you say a 'weak' 4 cylinder? Hardly. It's people such as yourself that have obliterated the ability to find true value in the pickup market by demanding size, volumes of power, and expensive updating.
I like the Ford Ranger. My brother used to have an 86 STX and that was a really cool truck. I dont have the need to carry 5 people myself. When ever I go out to see my friends I will always take the del sol so I dont have to drive them around lol. And weak 4cyl you say? Im going to assume youve owned a 4cyl truck before? If your trying to actually haul stuff its a freaking joke. I had a 2.3L Mazda B-series and a late model S-10 for a work truck and if I had my daily garage door load on that truck you had to floor it just to get moving. MPG dropped down to under 20. I would never own a joke of a truck to use it as a legit truck. And theres still plenty of value in the compact trucks in the base model Tacoma and Colorado.

Everybody has an opinion as to what a 'legit' pickup is. Obviously so do you, as you have dismissed the 4 cylinder Ranger. It's odd though because you speak of the Tacoma and the Colorado in the same post as a 'legit' truck. It's all opinion my friend. I've had two Rangers (2.5L and the 2.3). Both hauled substantial loads for me (ATV's, watercraft, soil, gravel, etc.) and I had no issues. Of course I don't consider the value of a compact truck in how fast I can go with a full load. My Rangers were certainly NOT a joke....but then again I didn't pretend that they had a V-8 in them either. The negatives you speak of are not what I encountered in the slightest.
 
^
I wouldnt say that the 4 cyl versions of the Tacoma and Colorado are "legit" trucks. But a 5cyl Colorado is pretty decent! Ive driven a base model Tacoma and that was the worst vehicle Ive driven in my life. Cant get up a hill for its worthless life. But for city truck hauling small things it was meant to do for the Toyota dealership it was great! But as a legit work truck its [censored].
 
These little trucks (even in 4 cyl form) are very useful and handy. When I was in college I worked for a company that installed satellite dishes, and we ran S-10s, those little trucks made us a ton of money! They also hauled around a ton of equipment, ladders and tools with no problems.

It did this all very slowly with the 2.2 OHV engine though! we'd run them up to 150k and sell them. By that point the bodies were all dented and beat up from abuse.
 
You obviously don't know how to drive one, it is not the truck. I had a 1995 longbed 2wd with a 2.3L 110 hp and a 5-speed manual, and yes it was slow compared to a car, but that's what revving the engine to its torque peak up to 3rd gear is for. Then shift. Match revs on the downshift and get flat on the gas to accelerate. It is pretty simple. Momentum.

I towed a double axle trailer with a Formula Ford or VW GTI for ice racing and it was fine. Over 75 mpg, you shouldn't be a towing trailer that fast. I hauled logs to the top of the cab, no problem.

The Colorado is too heavy and unreliable. Drives the best of all the small pickups from a handling perspective. The Ranger second.

I really looked hard at replacing my long bed Ranger with a Tacoma. No longbed, the Ranger 7' bed is discontinued, the Tacoma is 6' like most. I drove one and really didn't like it. It drives like a Camry not a truck. A mushy, sloppy handling comfy sofa. The prior model Tacoma was smaller and better. Around here, they rust like crazy - frame, body and cost. They aren't different in reliablity than the Ranger and cost $5000 more. So I bought a 2011 Ranger XLT SuperCab 4 cyl/5-speed for $16k. Plenty of power in the new engine. Rides too high though. I will put a lowering kit in it to return to normal (aka 1995) height.

I don't want a big truck. I want one that handles, doesn't ride high (lower=better handling and much safer), gets good mileage, must have a MANUAL transmission, and gasp!, actually does something like haul stuff (all of these trucks are rated much higher for export markets for warranty reasons in the US) and tow.

I don't care about how many people it can haul, if want that I'll get a car. I don't care about "features" or driving comfy like a Buick.

The reason they don't sell is that a white base F-150 or a base RAM sells for $17k, and that's to close in price to a small truck and much less than a Tacoma.
Originally Posted By: yaris0128
Originally Posted By: andrewg
Originally Posted By: yaris0128
Its fords own fault the Ranger has failed in the last few years. While the rest of the small pickups upsized and adapted to the changing market the ranger didnt change at all. It has been the same truck for waaaay to many years. If they had a larger model similar to the Tacoma then maybe people would have bought it. I for one would have no interest in a compact truck that I cant do a lot with. My parents have a 2005 Tacoma 4dr and that thing is great! Decent mileage and seating for 5! The Ranger is the only one on the market that cant do that these days. Waste of time to buy one unless you want to get a weak 4cyl to attempt to get good mileage.

Exactly why many of us LIKE the Ranger. I didn't want or need a bigger, more complex, expensive pickup. I don't care what market Ford is pandering toward to get higher sales....that's fine and part of what drives sales. But Ford, and other auto makers often ignore the cost conscious and thrifty buyer that just wants VALUE and not trying to keep up with the 'cool' factor. If a person wants a larger, 'real' pickup...there has never been a shortage of that. But in the last fifteen years the available selections for a simple 4 cylinder, small, reliable pickup has all but evaporated....especially now with the end of the Ranger. And who wants to seat 5 people in a compact truck? What's the point? Buy a sedan for crying out loud. And you say a 'weak' 4 cylinder? Hardly. It's people such as yourself that have obliterated the ability to find true value in the pickup market by demanding size, volumes of power, and expensive updating.
I like the Ford Ranger. My brother used to have an 86 STX and that was a really cool truck. I dont have the need to carry 5 people myself. When ever I go out to see my friends I will always take the del sol so I dont have to drive them around lol. And weak 4cyl you say? Im going to assume youve owned a 4cyl truck before? If your trying to actually haul stuff its a freaking joke. I had a 2.3L Mazda B-series and a late model S-10 for a work truck and if I had my daily garage door load on that truck you had to floor it just to get moving. MPG dropped down to under 20. I would never own a joke of a truck to use it as a legit truck. And theres still plenty of value in the compact trucks in the base model Tacoma and Colorado.
 
Originally Posted By: dishdude
These little trucks (even in 4 cyl form) are very useful and handy. When I was in college I worked for a company that installed satellite dishes, and we ran S-10s, those little trucks made us a ton of money! They also hauled around a ton of equipment, ladders and tools with no problems.

It did this all very slowly with the 2.2 OHV engine though! we'd run them up to 150k and sell them. By that point the bodies were all dented and beat up from abuse.
Thats better than what I was using an S-10 for. My garage door load was several hundred pounds of tools and parts. For light duty jobs like your dish installation thats perfection.
 
One of the oldest assembly plants, and Ford is shutting it down. This is 28th on the list after Saint Thomas IIRC.
 
I have the benefit of owning both trucks in discussion, one that many of you are giving [censored] about, i.e. Toyota Tacoma....unless you've actually owned one, one with the 3.4L V6 engine and aisian warner transmission you rightly have no say in arguing against it's reliability.

I bought this truck a few years back, it's an 04 Tacoma 4x4 4-dr that I paid less for then my company paid for the 03 ford ranger 4.0L V6 automatic that has shared my driveway and lifestyle for the last 5yrs.

The ranger has the king cab with mainly only comfortable seating for 2, the 2 back suicide doors are great for storing work equipment, but to even fit a child back there is insane.

The ranger has been through 4 transmissions, 3 thermostat housings (cause they're made of plastic), all kinds of suspension repairs, seatbelt replacements, eats front tires for breakfast even after hundreds of dollars on front-end work, alignments, etc......I will say it's engine is great, in terms of reliability.

The Tacoma hasn't had half the repairs, gets much better gas mileage, sits 4 very comfortably (if you want them, if not, there's a TON of inside storage space).

I paid $16k for this fully loaded Tacoma; my company paid over $20k for this partially loaded ford ranger.

Scary thing about this ford ranger, it can't hold it's rear-end down in the slightest of moist conditions, it will kiss it's front-end quicker then you can bat an eye if you're not careful. Doesn't seem to matter what kind of tires are on it, or how much weight is in the rear-end.

It does have a comfortable cab, but mainly cause the driver's seat was rebuilt after only 2yrs of use. This truck uses quite a bit of gas, if the company didn't pay for the fuel, it would be too expensive for me to drive it.

I have owned numerous little trucks of all makes and models, 4-cylinders to V6's, when you live in Colorado's high country, trust me a loaded down 4-cylinder/5spd pickup is breathing hard and heavy and can't move it's own weight in our mountains, and can actually prove to be a dangerous situation....been there down that, I guess you can say.

I don't need a truck built for comfort, but I do need a truck that can get out of it's own way at 11,000ft with only a small ATV in the back.
 
Last edited:
I owned two Rangers and am not sad to see them ride into the sunset.

The current Ranger was last updated mechanically in 2001. Tens years with the same frame, suspension and engines. Too long of a period to be competitive.

Ford couldn't make enough of them today if they sold them new for $12,000, but $28,000 for a loaded 4X4 extra-cab? The Tacoma and the Frontier are better trucks; more refined.
 
Originally Posted By: FXjohn
Just get a 6 cylinder single cab full size and move on with your lives.


Says the marketing/ PR guy on the internet.
smirk.gif
 
Originally Posted By: urchin
Originally Posted By: FXjohn
Just get a 6 cylinder single cab full size and move on with your lives.


Says the marketing/ PR guy on the internet.
smirk.gif



single cab v6 reg box short box aren't even that easy to find. look at one, they aren't much different than a tacoma or frontier.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top