Trucks.

[highangle]

Any beta on the new Ford Ranger? The reviews I'm seeing online are mixed at best and it looks like the 2020 isn't a big upgrade. I have an F-150 now. It's fine, don't really love it and it's just too big for what I need. I just don’t need a full size truck anymore, but not fully committed to going to a wagon of some sort. I hunt/fish just enough that I think a truck is still probably in play. Long story, but I should try and stick with Ford to keep family politics in-line.

Hey man, here's a 2003 Ranger 4x4 flareside. 209k miles Upper Michigan - no rust. $5 fkn K


https://www.ebay.com/i/383344187349

[jackattack]

Full-timing in a short bed tacoma is a bold move.

[XXX-er]

being form upper Michigan ? A hotrod car enthusiast i worked with in Vancover told me the further you got out of the big city the less salt they use on the roads so what they seen with cars real close to the american border in rural America is that they would have way less rust than cars on the Canadian side so it was about environment

in any case that is a 16 yr old truck sample size of 1, rust is likely to be on the driver side where water splashes up or the tailgate

yer right thats a ranger not a tacoma

[zion zig zag]

I drive a 2020 Ford Ranger for work, it's peppy enough and drives well but has been averaging 16.5 mpg over it's first 2500 miles. So what's the point? Go full size.

[Conundrum]

Grain of salt...I drove a 2000 Tacoma for many years...

Tacomas are for Instagram.

[Deebased]

You can actually feel that thing?

I've got a Malibu wake boat, weighs probably 500-750 lbs less than your setup wet, and I only really feel it on 10% plus grades in my DCLB Tundra. Long wheel base makes a ton of difference IMO but that weight should be child's play for a 350 diesel.

My tundra (5.7) DC gets pulled all over the place by the x-star. It's miserable to tow more than a few miles. This is coming from a 1 ton Ram but super disappointed in the tundra.

[altacoup]

I drive a 2020 Ford Ranger for work, it's peppy enough and drives well but has been averaging 16.5 mpg over it's first 2500 miles. So what's the point? Go full size.

Yeah. Unless you’re off-roading on tight roads. I don’t get the mid sized trucks. My GMC Sierra 1500 crew cab is averaging almost 16 mpg up and down little cottonwood. And if it wasn’t for all the ikon traffic jams in sure I’d be doing much better. Haven’t put any highway time in yet but they’re claiming 20+ mpg so it can only go up. The lady’s outback is way more comfortable than my buddy’s new taco. His taco was considerably more expensive than my Sierra

[lifelinksplit]

Well, surprise, it all comes down to what you actually use your truck for. I "upgraded" to a 1st gen tundra after an 88 pickup. Loved that little truck for getting everywhere I wanted to go in Montana. Sucked for towing even a driftboat. Pretty sure I'm in the minority but me and the old lady get pretty far off the beaten path and we built her 4runner for tight trails etc. My tundra is now my work truck/ base camp rig. I cant imagine getting some of the newer full size rigs getting to some of our favorite places. I do envy certain mags rides with Alaskan campers etc though.

[XXX-er]

Well, surprise, it all comes down to what you actually use your truck for. .

This ^^

but my favorite one to read on the webz is everybody who states they would buy a diesel 80's toyota and if they were available Toyota would sell a million, except if you goggle sales figures they dropped year after year cuz north americans don't want to buy mini PU's

[G. Gordon Liddy]

I drive a 2020 Ford Ranger for work, it's peppy enough and drives well but has been averaging 16.5 mpg over it's first 2500 miles. So what's the point? Go full size.

Yeah, I hear ya on the MPG compared to a full size, it's just I don't want a full size pick up anymore. Basically I'm down to a Ranger, an Explorer or a VW Golf Sportswagen.... So, I'm a bit all over the place if you can't tell. My other car is a Sprinter and it SUCKS on anything rougher than gravel roads... At the end of the day the Ranger is attractive b/c I can park around town, not have another massive vehicle on the road, and still pack an elk out in October...

[simple]

So then buy the Ranger. Go test drive one first. isn't going to be a disaster. It isn't a super high tech electric pickup that could catch fire at any moment.

[Dantheman]

I drive a 2020 Ford Ranger for work, it's peppy enough and drives well but has been averaging 16.5 mpg over it's first 2500 miles. So what's the point? Go full size.

That's what my old AF V8 F150 gets. How is that even possible? I mean, I know all about how bigger heat engines are inherently more efficient, but it still feels like it violates basic laws of physics.

[Mazderati]

The mileage may be similar but the 2.3L EcoBoost makes more power than the 5.0L and it's possible the new Ranger weighs more than an F-150 depending on year and trim. Not arguing right or wrong; just a data point.

[simple]

How do 4runners and tacomas get 18 mpg for 30 fucking years now?

Because the MPG laws don't apply to trucks for one. No incentive to make them better. Hug your auto industry lobby folks when you can.

[zion zig zag]

That's what my old AF V8 F150 gets. How is that even possible? I mean, I know all about how bigger heat engines are inherently more efficient, but it still feels like it violates basic laws of physics.

Right? It's a 4 cylinder with an auto start-stop function for better mpg. This is over three trucks being driven similarly, so not a one of. I've heard that there may be a class action suit against Ford for them inflating mpg numbers in sales materials, but haven't confirmed.

edit: https://www.detroitnews.com/story/bu...gs/1131809001/

[Dantheman]

The mileage may be similar but the 2.3L EcoBoost makes more power than the 5.0L and it's possible the new Ranger weighs more than an F-150 depending on year and trim. Not arguing right or wrong; just a data point.

True, a new Ranger probably is almost as big as my F150. FWIW mine's a '02 FX4, 5.4L, Supercab, 6.5' bed w/ standard shell.

[bagtagley]

Year for year, mid-size is noticeably smaller than any full size. Any new pickup is long for wheelin but nothing touches Tacoma in that dept that isn’t going to fall apart. People have varying and often wacky ideas on what is and isn’t reliable so I’ll skip that discussion and just ask, who buys a pickup for mileage?

[Mazderati]

How do 4runners and tacomas get 18 mpg for 30 fucking years now?

Because the MPG laws don't apply to trucks for one. No incentive to make them better. Hug your auto industry lobby folks when you can.

Isn't it trucks over a certain GVWR that are exempt from CAFE? I don't think the Tacoma or Ranger weigh enough for exemption. 'Heavy Duty' light trucks would be exempt and my understanding is that is why there are no manufacturer-advertised MPG numbers on window stickers of, say, a Ram 3500.

Manufacturers also know how MPG tests are conducted and use that to their advantage which is another reason advertised numbers may not match up with real world driving.

[simple]

Or like how in my TDi the mileage on the screen is better than actual which is still better than EPA numbers. This is after VW got caught cheating the test. Lol

[Mazderati]

...who buys a pickup for mileage?

I mean, I'd be alright with 500 torques and 25 MPG instead of 1000 torques, 15 MPG, and one more McDrink holder.

[bagtagley]

Heh. 500 torques and HP @25mpg would be sweet. Is that what we get from electric trucks?

I actually seriously considered mileage, but it felt appropriate to add that since it always comes up in the what’s the point discussions.

[jackattack]

Heh. 500 torques and HP @25mpg would be sweet. Is that what we get from electric trucks?

that's infinite torques at 0mph

[zion zig zag]

who buys a pickup for mileage?

Municipalities who feel responsible for the tax payer's money. If I had known I could've gotten the same mileage with an F150 I would've bought 3 of those. And saved money not buying short handled shovels.

[highangle]

Municipalities who feel responsible for the tax payer's money. If I had known I could've gotten the same mileage with an F150 I would've bought 3 of those. And saved money not buying short handled shovels.

That shit sounds actionable.
But what's your operating elevation? Top of LCC is like 8000', right?

[frorider]

That's what my old AF V8 F150 gets. How is that even possible? I mean, I know all about how bigger heat engines are inherently more efficient, but it still feels like it violates basic laws of physics.

Fuelly is a shitty site that inadvertently encourages incorrect data inputs re engine size or 4WD, but overall it supports what I’ve heard from 2.3 Ranger owners: 21-23 mpg in mixed driving.