New Ford Ranger mega thread

I am curious how the 10 speed does too, seems like GM and Ford spent a lot of time a resources designing it though.

 

If every negative post were true there wouldn't be any functional vehicles on the planet. There seems to be an unfortunate tendency to extrapolate from my truck broke to every truck will break. The difficulty is in sifting all of it for trends and even then you can have good luck or bad.

 

True but they have to weigh that expense in materials and r&d. Some manufacturers do that better than others.

 

Folks in the mountains will buy this like crazy simply due to the Turbo motor. Gotta love not having to worry about N/A major power loss.

 

Looks like Ridgeline and a Nissan had a baby

 

The Ranger looks pretty handsome in this video. Guy is right about our crawl control being herky jerky at the slowest setting. If the rangers operates similar then that system clearly wins. The exhaust hanging down on our tacoma is also a mind boggling design.

I recently drove my first 10 speed auto, a 2019 acura rdx aspec which has a 2 liter turbo. I came away very impressed in the smoothness of the combo. If the ranger combo is anything similar it should be a great truck.

 

Test drove the ranger last weekend up in Havasu at the Sand and Water Expo. Honestly, it was smooth, accelerated pretty well, was a comfortable ride, and looks ok, but that's all it has going for it at this point. They stuck huge black and yellow bins from costco with who knows what in the bed to add weight to the rear so it would feel softer to the average car/suv driver, a big downside for me. I really wanted to feel it in its raw form, but whatever. Their crawl control is almost the same as the tacoma. Being its the 2.3, it had to spin up quite a lot to get it up their test bench, and that simply just adds to the time it takes for it to actually make it up the ramp. I'm used to the 10 spd simply because I already own a 17 lariat with the 3.5tt and 10spd. The 2.3 with its smaller displacement than the 2nd gen 3.5tt made the stop/start feature feel almost non existent feeling, it was magic. I can clearly feel the stop/start system in my 17 lariat. If I give it any peddle in my 17, it lurches forward because the start sequence simply takes just a split second too long. I asked about this 2.3 block and how it compares to the RS's original block issues and newer mustang 2.3 issues, but the tour manager couldn't give me a clear answer. Honestly, its sad this pre production vehicles get junked after production is started, I would by one in a heart beat simply for the price, but rules are rules.
Now talking about interior, rear leg room and height is HORRIBLE! I'm 6ft and barely fit back there, even with the seat at my normal position up front. That cab is cramped all over. The huge center console needs to go, they honestly need to rebrand the crew cab ranger as a super cab, suicide the current rear doors, and call it a day, and of course make a 3rd option and lengthen the current crew cab's rear to make it a true crew cab size. This crew cab does not live up to its bigger brothers interior size as a comparison. I could put a twin bed in 17's crew cab rear its so large. Honestly, I think this new ranger will be hyped up for the next 3-4 years and eventually fizzle down into nothing but another commercial fleet vehicle.

 

Found this .pdf with the specs currently available - https://www.ranger5g.com/downloads/2019-Ford-Ranger-Technical-Specs.pdf https://www.ranger5g.com/forum/threads/2019-ford-ranger-tech-specs.1072/

This shows some differences btwn the Focus 2.3t and the Ranger 2.3t https://www.ranger5g.com/forum/threads/2019-ranger-2-3l-ecoboost-engine-intro.1018/

It does have an 18 gallon fuel tank, which I'm not a fan of. Sure, the EPA rating is 21/26/23 for the 2WD, and towing maybe you get a few MPG better than a N/A because of the torque (I believe max torque 310lbs is at 3000 RPM), but why not put at least a 21g fuel tank in it?

Interior dimensions, current published specs have the Ranger with 2 inches more rear legroom than the Taco.

 

I felt I had more legroom in the back of the Ranger than the Taco. That spec confirms that.

 

2nd gens have more room behind the seats than the Ranger did but when I was purchasing Rangers they had the best legroom and no wheel well in the foot well which was unique in the class. Also Tacomas didnt get access doors until '05. I'm digging the 400+ mi range I now have though even using just 18 gallons. with an 18 gallon tank you won't want to use more than 16 or you'll be replacing fuel pumps.

 

That was a poor decision to put an 18g fuel tank into the new Ranger. Makes no sense on any level.

 

I'm puzzled by this too because the overseas Ford Ranger models get a 21 gallon tank. But the Ranger I test drove had a fuel range of 360 miles on the computer and that was halfway between full and 3/4 tank which is still pretty impressive. I guess Ford did the small tank as a way to reduce weight because to help with sweet mpg's? Maybe a 21 gallon tank will be a future option?

 

Is that a Ridgeline on 35's?

 

The problem is that you said your current vehicle is a Lariat 3.5EB which I assume is a Supercrew. The Ranger will feel super small to you. I have a 2012 XLT Supercrew and I can assure you I will never go back to a mid size truck.

 

I have my 07 Taco as well, it’s smaller in the back that my DCSB. I can actually fit in the rear of my Tacoma.

 

I believe this is the first clip of the Ford Ranger's trail control in an off road environment:

https://twitter.com/mrlevine/status/1053753868280975360?s=20

 

Looks like any ol truck with a rear locker

 

https://youtu.be/YhBcYCf76J8

 

That interior is unimpressive, especially for a lariat.