woods wrote:I actually had a Toyota Hilux with the diesel, the little critter was great and got almost 40mpg. I would probably step up and pay the extra for a small diesel, but I think I'm in the minority when it comes to that. I just really like them.
I hear you on that one woods. Years ago I had an 85 Ford ranger with the four banger and 5 speed transmission and it routinely on the highway would get 33-34 MPG. I know it did not have the pwer of todays vehicles but what the hey?
"If it can't be fixed with a hammer, then it is an electrical problem"
69 Ford F100 Ranger 390 3spd with overdrive
63 Chevy Impala 327 with 4spd. In the family since brand new. Over 280,00 miles
I disagree with that article. The new ranger is no longer a compact it is a large midsize pickup. Even with demand down for the 30 year old based ranger it is still 100,000 units a year I believe. That is a pretty good return on an investment there. I feel and again just my opinion that Ford is nervous that the new ranger would cut into the 150 sales. I still look at much better fuel economy good payload capacity and a good tow rating for all the mile I drive it would be the vehicle for me. Lets face it $1.50 gas let alone $3.00 gas is gone forever. Just my Maybe I should move my rantings into the "they are out to get me thread"
i'm not disagreeing, but gas is under 3.00 a gal here right now. . yes the new ranger is bigger, ford doesn't want to cut into 150 sales (he says that in the article), and sales of the existing platform are way down. things evolve and companies want to make the most money they can. they killed the thunderbird when it dropped below 100k units and it was a very popular car. same with the taurus.
wanting to buy a mercury tailgate! "the man who is swimming against the stream knows the strength of it".- woodrow wilson
I disagree with that article. The new ranger is no longer a compact it is a large midsize pickup. Even with demand down for the 30 year old based ranger it is still 100,000 units a year I believe. That is a pretty good return on an investment there. I feel and again just my opinion that Ford is nervous that the new ranger would cut into the 150 sales. I still look at much better fuel economy good payload capacity and a good tow rating for all the mile I drive it would be the vehicle for me. Lets face it $1.50 gas let alone $3.00 gas is gone forever. Just my Maybe I should move my rantings into the "they are out to get me thread"
i'm not disagreeing, but gas is under 3.00 a gal here right now. . yes the new ranger is bigger, ford doesn't want to cut into 150 sales (he says that in the article), and sales of the existing platform are way down. things evolve and companies want to make the most money they can. they killed the thunderbird when it dropped below 100k units and it was a very popular car. same with the taurus.
Ooooowwwwww under $3.00 a gallon by you that hurts. The best we have here is $3.59 a gallon and diesel at best $4.00 a gallon.
"If it can't be fixed with a hammer, then it is an electrical problem"
69 Ford F100 Ranger 390 3spd with overdrive
63 Chevy Impala 327 with 4spd. In the family since brand new. Over 280,00 miles
I have a 98 Ford Ranger with 197,000 miles on it and it had 14,000 miles when I bought it. I would have to say that it is the best vehicle I have owned for a long time. My daughter has driven it for four years and I commuted 70 miles a day in it before she took over. She currently uses it at college which is six and a half hours away from home. Mine has a 4.0 and an automatic tranny, so it gets 19 miles to the gallon going down hill with a tail wind. Most everything on it works with the exception of some dash lights. My recommendation is drive that thing, change the oil every 3,000 miles and polish it occasionally. Do not put gas shocks on it or it will ride worse than my 72 F250! Voice of experience speaking on that issue. I have no plans to sell my Ranger as I have a really hard time selling a vehicle that runs great and gives me few problems. Now if you would like to talk about my Odyssey, 1996 Buick, or my 2005 Taurus, I can tell you some stories. Both the Buick and Odyssey have rebuilt transmissions and the Taurus is scheduled for next Tuesday at the transmission shop. Notice that my C6 has never been rebuilt, but then it is only 40 years old.
You made a good choice when you bought that Ranger!
I just got my "little old lady" Ranger literally from my Grandparents as a freebie. Its an 88 4WD 2.9L and had 43k miles about 3 months ago. It gets decent mileage on my daily 50 mile commute. A tank goes all week. Yes I took the massive bug deflector, cap and Yosemite Sam mud flaps off. The thing drives like new.
-Jeff
1971 F-100 240 straight six, 3 on the tree (parted out)
1972 F-100 302 auto trans, pwr steering, pwr brakes (under construction)
"Things are more like they are now than they ever were before" Dwight Eisenhower
i have owned this truck for not quite a month and have already put almost 1000 miles on it. i have filled it up three times and have calculated my fuel mileage at 24 and some change so far. i can live with that!
wanting to buy a mercury tailgate! "the man who is swimming against the stream knows the strength of it".- woodrow wilson
. yes the new ranger is bigger, ford doesn't want to cut into 150 sales (he says that in the article), and sales of the existing platform are way down. things evolve and companies want to make the most money they can. they killed the thunderbird when it dropped below 100k units and it was a very popular car. same with the taurus.
