New Ford Ranger mega thread

Google "Fiat Ram 700". My phones acting up so I can't download a photo right now. They are what a "mini truck" used to be in the 70s and 80s. They are in dealers showrooms in Latin America .

There are older model VW, Hyundai, and others down here too. Very small pickups. I think of them as micro trucks. Never saw them before coming down here.

 

Ford knows how to sell trucks.

 

I would not put much stock in a magazine review, those same reviews always bash on the Tacoma and praise garbage like the Ridgeline.

 

Agreed. My last two Yukon XLs with the 5.3 both got 25 plus on the highway and 21 city. That cylinder deactivation works miracles for such heavy vehicles.

 

The GM 5.3 is a very efficient engine. I know guys that have one, and they always seem to get the same or a bit better mileage than my Tacoma. But l still love my Tacoma.

 

The 5.3L also makes poor power down low. The 2.7 L Ecoboost and 5.0 L Coyote make it look silly in tow tests and get about the same economy.

 

Not the slightest bit interested until they make a manual transmission option with a naturally aspirated v6. Turbos are fun and all but I like non-turbo engines for the long haul.

 

The 5.3 is mostly geared towards economy but mine has plenty of power for my needs. Could you show me one of those tests where the 2.7TT makes it look silly?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Wkqw0GC63rI

 

http://www.fordf150blog.com/2-7-liter-ecoboost-vs-chevy-5-3-v8/
It’s cited from motortrend about half way down the page. I’d definitely like to see a newer comparison with the newer transmissions though. This is from 2015.

 

I didn't have any transmission issues with the Ranger I test drove. It was very smooth. I didn't mind the interior too much. I thought the Tacoma's interior was better, but driving experience in the Ranger was on a better level. I'm actually a fan that this is an international version. My only gripe is the small fuel tank.

 

I know the 2.7 is not rated to tow what the 5.3 will but the 2.7 is a beast for sure. The issue is that it’s a lot of boost with little eco. I have friends that have them and the 2.7 will straight out fly but does stay in boost a lot so the mileage is just not that good. Now I’m a huge fan of the Coyote V8. Good motor. No arguing that.

 

Looks like this guy on the Ranger forum is having a bad day.

https://www.ranger5g.com/forum/threads/first-ranger-in-the-shop.1609/

 

At least it'll be covered under warranty unlike the $1200 drive shaft fix on my 63,000 mile Tacoma 4X4 a couple years ago.

 

https://www.ranger5g.com/forum/threads/first-ranger-in-the-shop.1609/page-2#post-17000

This is the kind of thing I worry with Fords - they are using a plastic transmission pan.

 

Post #23 in the link is funny. That said I'm going to give Ford a pass on this one. Brand new vehicle (it's not really the same as the global Ranger) for them and I'm sure they are being rushed through production. A mistake was made during assembly. Let's see how Ford and the dealer make it right (or not). Let's see if this is a fluke or a repeated problem before we grab the tar and feathers. Remember though this is a transmission that was a joint venture between Ford and GM. For the most part it is successful in many vehicles.

 

The F150s used a plastic pan on the Transmission and 2.7 L Ecoboost engines now. The pans leak if they're overtorqued, which was really common on the first 2018 F150s. Ford fixed the issue on the newest trucks with some tighter tolerances at the F150 plant. I'm sure they will have to do the same on these trucks. My buddy had his leak until Ford swapped the pan.

Too be fair I'm not betting on thin aluminum on being any tougher than a plastic pan over time, and the plastic pans on the F150 don't need a seperate gasket apparently which is kind of nice when you do replace them. The gasket is preseated in the pans, which is part of the problem if you over torque them down.

 

Plastic parts holding hot oil will always be a risk item over time. The plastic oil pan may be stronger than an aluminum pan when new. It probably won't be 5 years from now.

Sometimes a bad design decision can be supported with good initial-quality statistics, but it's still a bad design decision when released into the field. It's like the Ford Fusion water pump being driven by the timing chain - when the water pump leaked, coolant mixed with engine oil. Or GM's Hydroboost brake booster, where a power steering leak knocks out both power steering and power brakes at the same time...

It'll also be interesting to see if carbon deposits will be an issue on these engines over time. Forced induction, no oil catch can, and direct injection, so fuel doesn't wash the intake ports or the back of the valves.

 

Comment #23 is great.

 

Interesting videos. At 01:05, the pothole testing is done unmanned to reduce driver fatigue:

 

Don't let the members of that forum see Tacomaworld is more like it.


TWFTW