Explain why ford rangers ARENT the best vehicle.

Taco

>>16853537
Mpg comparable to a more capable full sized truck.

>>16853546
No

>>16853537
Ford.

>>16853548
16 city. As compared to 12 in a full size. I get the mpg of a sedan mate

File: user65105_pic59292_1378606872.jpg (74KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 800x450px

>>16853553
Yes

>>16853537
They aren't good at anything

>>16853560
If you didnt get a completly shit one youre alright.

>>16853537
Even the 4.0 versions are turds. They really needed a veeate.

Otherwise I don't have a problem with them and greatly prefer them to how retardedly fuckhueg the effwunfiddy has gotten.

File: dsc_1493.jpg (2MB, 3872x2592px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3872x2592px

>>16853569
They ALL rust.

>>16853581
Name one car that doesn't rust.

>>16853569
>If you didnt get a completly shit one youre alright.
They're all completely shit

>If you didnt get a one youre alright.
oh wait, I see

File: maxresdefault.jpg (177KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 1920x1080px

>>16853591
Delorean
Now fuck off.
Ford a shit

File: 2ba6931b2976562f-framerust3.jpg (381KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

381KB, 800x600px

>>16853595
That's just the body. The frame is still regular steel just like any other car.

File: Audi-ASF-Concept-1993-02[1].jpg (168KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 1280x960px

>>16853595
Anon, Delorean frames still rust, just the bodies are okay.
You could've named any aluminum or composite car.

File: IMG_0333.jpg (151KB, 960x572px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 960x572px

>>16853537
>no v8 option ever
>first ranger was an f100 trim so doesn't count
Don't get me wrong I own one myself

>>16853537
>people who daily a ranger

welcome to hell

the vulcans

File: 1488523680902.jpg (66KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 1024x1024px

>>16853627

>>16853537
>Vulcan

I3 in disguise

File: 1489368777684.png (12KB, 243x243px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 243x243px

>>16853627
whats the matter with driving a ranger daily?

>>16853712
daily-ed one before they're great haul trucks don't get me wrong but the suspension just rots away i've replaced the struts, tie rods, shocks, differntial plate, and a control arm in my 3 years of ownership and the vulcan just struggles to make power

>>16853754
>not getting soch 4.0 master race

>>16853546
>>16853552
>>16853560
>this faggot again
Your mazda is a no name POS.

File: ball joints.jpg (121KB, 962x716px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 962x716px

>>16853539
>ball joints
>rust meme
Nah

File: IMG_20170219_145629.jpg (2MB, 2448x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2448x2448px

>>16853898
unfortunately: this ^^

If you get the 3.0, you get the gas mileage of the 4.0 with the power of the 2.3 so you end up hating the Ranger. The only way to love one is if you buy a 2.3 I4 that's e z to turbo and don't expect much power / only need the bed.
Or you get the compact 4.0 V6 OHV or post-2008 SOHC.

>>16853932
What if I live in California?

>>16853944
shut up, tacofag

File: 1430428082067.jpg (70KB, 712x795px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 712x795px

>>16853754
>ranger
>struts
You don't own a ranger, do you?
>>16853944
Enjoy your rust free ball joint failure

>>16853964
pre-98

My first car was a ranger. It was shit but it was my shit. Good thing I didn't have to go anywhere far at the time because that car was not built for highway speeds. Something was wrong with the hose that connects from the gas cap to the tank so I'd spend a long ass filling up

File: 1446256914078.jpg (81KB, 653x490px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 653x490px

i miss my '90 ranger

>>16853979
I have that on my 2010 Ranger too.
CLANK* CLANK* CLANK*. It's much worse in the winter but it has like a metaphorical g-spot when you insert the hose. You kinda have to push down and pull the handle slightly up in order to make it register.

>>16853980
buy another one for like $2000 and beat it to death offroading with chains running 9psi

>>16853979
>>16853993
>Something was wrong with the hose that connects from the gas cap to the tank
Holy fuck mine does that too, granted my jeep before it did the same thing too.

File: tacorot2.jpg (93KB, 993x563px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 993x563px

>>16853560
Shackle looks intact, (they always rust out) frame rails look fine/no holes. I don't know what point you're trying to make with that pic but there's nothing there that looks Taco levels of horrifying.

File: bed liner on f150 frame.jpg (34KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 640x480px

>>16853581
I guess if you REALLY wanted to fix the rust you could. Remove cab, remove bed, inspect rusty frame, if no holes in metal then sand it, prime it, paint it with black bed liner, put cab back on, put bed back on, and done. Lengthy but worth it if you REALLY love Rangers.

File: JACKIE.jpg (10KB, 291x173px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 291x173px

>>16853595
The missing (presumably rusted) pieces needed to repair that are $35 from RockAuto.

>>16853998
Yeah it's those old anti-siphoning devices that really fuck you up. Like I said, most vehicles have a G-Spot where you learn how to fill it up.
>T L C
>L
>C

>>16854001
>coil spring rear end
Weird

File: 1489810938222.jpg (140KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 800x450px

What's this stuff? My '94 doesn't have anything like that.

>>16853911
Lol wut?
Why you so ass blasted?

>>16854034
The circle to the right is the spare tire hoist I think, not sure what the other thing is.

>>16854033
My bad. That's a 4runner, not a Tacoma.

>>16854042
You post the same three images every single time.

>>16854061
They dont stop being applicable.
Im not going to have 100s of photos dedicated to shit posting.
It only takes 3 or so to upset all the ford fags.

My point was proven.
Thank you and goodnight

File: spare.jpg (20KB, 357x268px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 357x268px

>>16854045
Thanks. No cable/winch on mine, just a bar that swings down from below.

>>16854071
Ford always wins in the end, your truck got kicked out of the US because the ranger was that much better.

>>16853939
2.3 Duratec is a little screamer. AR103 plugs are your friend.

File: Trav Creek Crossing.jpg (511KB, 1569x1176px) Image search: [Google]

511KB, 1569x1176px

>>16854089
My truck? I dont have a truck.
But ill assume you mean the bravo?
Ford paid mazda to stop selling them in the US because they didnt want competition.
The bravo is an amazing truck. Excellent reliability and sold all over the world.
Dunno what youre so mad about.

>>16854097
>cucked by Ford
Will Mazda ever recover?

>>16854108
Stay ass blasted.

File: Hesright.jpg (72KB, 800x598px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 800x598px

>>16853939
>If you get the 3.0, you get the gas mileage of the 4.0 with the power of the 2.3 so you end up hating the Ranger.

File: one point seven.jpg (123KB, 1076x771px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 1076x771px

>>16854112
Stay in your cuckmobile that couldn't compete

File: 20170315_201629.png (180KB, 720x650px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 720x650px

>>16854119
Lol
I dont have time to argue. I have to go to sleep.
Just look up fords history
Look up how many vehicles are based on mazda chassis and use mazda engines (to this very day)
Ford would be nothing without mazda.
They would only make trucks and mustangs.
Also read about how when ford used mazda engines, they used their own (cheap) electronics and other random parts that caused them to be less reliable than their mazda counterparts.

Ford is a sad sack of failure. Only idiots who dont do the research think ford is good.

>>16854139
>trusting ratings of disgruntled customers
Literally every automaker has shit ratings on consumer reports
>Ford would be nothing without mazda
Mazda is already nothing so I don't see what you're getting at

>>16853559
Midsize sedans get like 20mpg city all day with 250-300hp v6, even 20 year old ones

>>16854297
So do AWD Turbo 4's :)

>>16853537
Because weak axles, cost more than a more capable half-ton.

>>16854370
The 8.8 is a half ton axle senpai

>>16854370
I think the 4cyl/3.0 got 7.5" and the 4.0 got 8.8"

>>16854139
Only the 4 cylinder engines are mazda designs, and ford no longer uses any mazda platforms.

>>16854568
The V6 Duratec and Ecoboost engines are the Mazda MZI V6.

>>16854698
You've got it the other way around. The Mazda MZI is a Ford Cyclone v6

>>16854698
>>16854370
>GM fangirl backs away and pretends this thread never happened
pathetic

>>16853617
>VAG
No.

>>16853537
Room. My big ass is 280 pounds. Totalled a few. Had some 4x4. Good trux

Was riding in my buddies ranger, had about 76K miles on it and the timing belt just disintegrated.
Rattled the driveline to pieces.

He went out and got a Tacoma, and that now has 214K on it.

Eat shit ford.

>>16855183
>timing belt just disintegrated.
>Rattled the driveline to pieces.
>things that didn't happen

>>16854161
>Mazda is already nothing so I don't see what you're getting at
Ford shills are so fucking sad lmao.

Kill yourself you retarded piece of shit.

>>16855233
Meant valvetrain. Need more coffee.
Still, things are a piece of shit. They're made of paper Mache and dreams.

Saw one get rear ended by a 4Runner once. 4Runner had some scuffs, the rangers tail gate looked like a crater.

File: ranger.png (37KB, 597x441px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 597x441px

>>16853548
Negative

>>16853537
They arent even the best compact trucks

>>16855329
>posting the 4cyl mpg instead of the 6cyl mpg

You see how it gets 17mpg city?
Its because the 4cyl is so fucking weak, it strains to pull its own weight at stoplights. Fucking useless as an actual truck to pull or haul things.

We all know that you didnt post the 4.0 mpg because its within 1-2mpg of a full size truck. The full size truck which will outwork and be more capable in every single way.

The 4cyl is great if you want to get groceries though.

>>16855372
Dude, calm down, it's my truck. I don't have infinite vehicles to run this analysis on.

>>16855380
My commute to work is about 1.5 miles so it takes a hard hit on city mileage with frequent short trips. It's also done great hauling things. Used it to help people move furniture and other stuff. So it serves it purpose well.

>>16855391
>>16855380
I drove a 2.2l s10 and it was the same exact story.

The "furniture" and "hauling" capable of these trucks is akin to the sort of hauling you can do with a dodge caravan that has its back seats removed.

My buddy had a Ranger back in the day. Cute little car. Manual transmission and even the cab had decent space in the back considering what it was.

unfortunately, it's a thing of the past. just has no place in today's trucks

>>16855391
>driving 1.5 miles
fucking why

Its not a racecar

File: sad_pepe.jpg (7KB, 316x202px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 316x202px

>>16855435
Because I don't have any control over where my job is located :(

>>16855372
A 2010 4cyl ranger has the same horsepower as an older v6 ranger, they're pretty powerful all things considered

>>16855447
But you do have control over your feet, haven't you?

File: pasta.jpg (66KB, 437x437px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 437x437px

>>16855464
Yeah and I value my life to not want to cross two dangerous highways on foot or bike and get pancaked

>>16854034
In the left circle looks like emissions garbage like the charcoal cannister.

Splash a best, Edge a shit.

4.0l OHV a best, SOHC a shit.

That is all.

>>16854711
Lol no

File: Erectric.jpg (99KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 800x600px

>be ford
>be 1997
>successfully create an all electric vehicle
>put it in the Ranger for some raisin
>still a few hundred of these on the road today

>people arguing about ford vs mazda trucks

The joke is that they're the exact same truck, right?

>>16854139
>look up fords history!!!
>s-s-starting in the mid 2000s. H-haha showed h-him
Only people who can't wrench buy a new car

>>16853537
It doesn't corner it can't offroad and it isn't powerful, luxurious, comfy or fast.
All it does is have a space in the back where people don't put anything.

Be ause their plastic intake manafold, and plastic thermostat housing shits itself after a hundred thousand miles, then the lower ball joints wear out and it starts to eat tires at 120000 and it sucks inside. It is literally a shit car with a shit interior that looks like it was melted together in a microwave, everything rattles. The door seals wear out and there is no way to adjust the doors to close tighter, so you have to listen to whistling and door rattles forever. The tires were too small stock, the suspension is too bard for the road and has no travel off road. This is probably the second worst car i have ever driven... A turd if ever there was one...

>>16856077
Huh?
Start in 1979 nigger.
Ford a a shit

>>16856188
Which Mazda platforms and engines did they use in 79

93 XL with Hose It Out interior here. And yeah, I miss that truck. Some fucker ran a red light and t-boned me.

Rangers really are God Tier, except, if you get a regular cab, they're small. Like, REAL small. If you're a big guy, though you'll learn to deal with it, you'll never truly find a comfortable seating position.

Speaking of seats, every Ranger that has a bench seat will develop an asshole. I don't know what it is, but the seat will fucking fail. And you don't even need to be a big guy. They all do it.

When my seat went to shit, I went to the junkyard and pulled the split bench with a center console from an XLT, plus while I was there, I grabbed the XLT door panels with the pockets, and the XLT shifter surround with the cup holders. Made for a hell of a lot more comfortable ride.

File: 79 F150 ranger.jpg (82KB, 1000x650px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 1000x650px

>>16856272
ITT: faggots that know nothing about Fords think that Rangers have always been compact trucks

>>16856077
Mazda and Ford went way, way back before mid-2000's. The first successful marriage was the Ford Courier/Mazda Sundowner in the 70's.

The Ford Probe was closely related to the MX6, the Mazda 323/Protege was closely related to the Ford Escort starting in 1991, and starting in 1992, the Mazda B series was a rebadged Ranger. And NO, the Ranger was not a Mazda, despite what RCR fucked up. The Mazda was a Ranger, through and through. Ford did use Mazda transmissions in a few Rangers, but that was the extent of Mazda's input.

>>16856355
I mispoke, the Mazda starting in 94 was a rebadged Ranger, not 92. The Ranger that the Mazda was based on started in 92 though. (Well, the first 93 Rangers should have been 92 1/2 because they came out in the summer of 92, but for some reason, car makers quit with half year designations)

>>16856310
They also think the 2.3 was always made by Mazda

>>16855593
The MZI 3.7 and 3.5 are both ford engines, fuck off.

>ITT: Mazda truck owner(s) btfo

>>16857195
No mazda fan would claim that pile engine
>>16857274
No
>>16857320
How so?

>>16857637
>tfw own 4 ford Lima 2.3s all with over 400k miles

File: duratec.jpg (118KB, 739x873px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 739x873px

>>16857637
Kill yourself, idiot.

File: 3.5.jpg (69KB, 848x176px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 848x176px

>>16857637
Again, kill yourself.

>>16855329
I4 Ranger is about the same on fuel as a 1 ton Duramax.

>>16855456
>A 2010 4cyl ranger has the same horsepower as an older v6 ranger
Peak HP, maybe. Not relevant for anything that you'd prefer a truck for.

>they're pretty powerful all things considered
How so?

>>16856310
This thread is about the Ranger model, not the Ranger trim package.

>>16857695
Diesels are fundamentally more efficient than gasoline engines. The 80s ranger diesel got 40ish mpg.

>>16857720
So buy a Duramax, not a Ranger?

>>16857746
Sure, if you want to spend 10-15k more and want a huge truck.

>>16857754
with 100-200 thousand more miles*

>>16857754
My 2010 4.0 V6 has a towing capacity of something stupid like 2500 kg. That's enough for a dolly carrying a crossover.

>>16857666
>>16857670
This proves nothing at all.
There are contradicting articles saying Mazda designed it and ford stamped fomoco on it.
I'm inclined to believe the more reputable car company (Mazda)

>>16857776
>[citation needed]
Though I will concede that the 3.7 is a mazda version of the cyclone.

>>16857695
My 2.3 ranger gets 22 city 33 highway so I doubt it

>>16857764
Diesels last longer than gas engines.

>>16857795
With significantly more expensive maintenance. If you're not towing the ranger is a much better DD.

>>16857773
I towed my friend's VW gti on a dolly with my 99 4.0 ohv, and while going wasn't a problem stopping was a little sketch. I think the 2010s had disc brakes all around so maybe yours would be better.

>ford

>>16857695
My ranger still gets the job done, so it's plenty powerful in my book.

>>16854297
My dude. Look up tauros mpg. Look up lesabre mpg.

File: 1487557074096.png (379KB, 435x741px) Image search: [Google]

379KB, 435x741px

>living the shit Vulcan life as my daily
>there's 2 acres behind the plant I work in where management leave their half-assed car projects to die
>there's an SVO Mustang that was stripped down and roll-caged in a Roadkill Vette-cart manner
>the whole car's rusted out, but they kept the 2.3 Turbo completely clean and intact, along with 3 T5's stacked in the car
Realistically how feasible does the swap sound? If not I'm probably just gonna nab the turbo and figure out something to do with it

>>16860417
depends what year ranger you have

>>16855302

The t-belt motors (2.3 and 2.5 Limas) are non interference motors...

File: IMG_20170311_104822463_HDR.jpg (4MB, 4320x2432px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4320x2432px

Picked up a little reg cab 2.3 red 5spd in XLT trim last week, just for running chores and some landscaping projects I have planned this year. Fun little truck to drive, mine isn't too rusty on the body although the bottoms of the doors are pretty shot in the inside. I wouldn't call them the greatest or best built, there's a number of small things wrong that a similar mileage/age Toyota would not be dealing with, but then again a pickup/Tacoma with only 125k would have cost me twice as much to buy.

>>16861554
Nice. Get some tinted windows and you'll be set

>>16853537
They're not. They were fleet vehicles at the consulting comany i used to work for.
>interior is laughably bad
>4.0L V6 is slow af and gets terrible gas mileage
>fleet tacomas were better in every situation (especially snow)

When i totalled one of our rangers at work, one of the managers secretly thanked me. Everyone knows that they're pieces of shit and the tacomas are superior in every way.

>>16861882
>comany
Everything you said was absolute BS

>>16860882
92 longbed

>>16861882
>tacomas
>better
Until the ball joint fails and kills you or the frame rusts in half

>>16863637
Would probably be an easy swap then

>>16863871
See
>>16853573
And
>>16853546

>>16853539
say goodbye to your frames after they rust and snap

>>16863894
>cherry picked images
You're a terrible troll. The ball joint truck is prerunnered out and was jumped. Meanwhile in toyota land ball joints fail on nice flat highways, because the absolutely retarded design of the ball joints, the forces acting on them always want to pull the joint apart rather than pushing them together like literally every other car. Rangers do not have the documented rust issues that shitty american toyotas have. The boxed frame on the toyota does not let the owner properly rinse the frame out in winter causing the extreme rust issues.

god i hate brand fanboyism so much.

File: 1428610979047.jpg (13KB, 237x213px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 237x213px

>>16864074
>he bought a tacoma

File: 20160728_184837.jpg (500KB, 1632x918px) Image search: [Google]

500KB, 1632x918px

>>16864157
nope

>>16864176
Nice truck

>>16861817

nah got a bunch of maintenance to get done (shocks are beyond gone, e-brake cable got snipped a while back, filler neck is leaky, HVAC directional control is inop, power steering leak), aesthetically I'm just touching up and preventing rust, and putting her to work.

>>16853537
jack of no trades, master of none

>>16856083
>can't off road
That's where you're wrong kiddo.

I think that anyone that thinks Rangers are in some way overall better than other midsize trucks in terms of specifications, or reliability/durability is sorely mistaken. Rather, embrace the fact that they're are so common, cheap to buy and easy to work on, and yes relatively durable and can be fairly affordably made pretty capable.

>>16864074
This.

>>16864417
Rangers are still the patrician's choice of small trucks. Best overall combination of affordability, reliability and capability. Also rangers are compact, not midsize.

The Toyota I4's can actually produce torque and still be reliable

>>16855978
>fully electric Rangers
ya ok

File: ranger ev axle.jpg (186KB, 732x351px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 732x351px

>>16864547
yes

>>16864034
>documented issues
>cherry picked
Hahahah delusional ford fags

File: ball joint failure.jpg (211KB, 1187x922px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 1187x922px

>>16864931
You're not even trying

File: rust.jpg (189KB, 1756x562px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 1756x562px

>>16864973

>>16864973
>>16864981
>google algorithms prove im right
Hahahaha
Ford fags are super retarded

>no v6 in regular cab
WHY

File: Screen Shot 2017-03-19 at 8.40.31 PM.png (159KB, 1268x428px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 1268x428px

>

>>16861554

Seeing as I'm in a thread full of Rangerfags, anybody dealt with a randomly surging idle on a 2.3 Lima? I'll start mine up cold, it doesn't really do a fast idle or anything, but will then pop up by 500 rpm or so for a second then drop back down. Then will pop back up in about 5 seconds, etc etc. I'm reading there might be any number of culprits (vac leaks, IACV, power steering pressure switch). Anybody with those exact symptoms before?

File: Capture.jpg (136KB, 1018x653px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 1018x653px

>>16865234

>>16865320
No CEL?

>>16865399

Nope, nothing my scanguage picked up.

because they don't sell them in a good size anymore (just like OP pic)

>god tier
>Not a frontier
I get 22 mph in the city on that truck

They're good for what they are, a disposable small work truck.

File: 1488262131188.jpg (568KB, 4000x545px) Image search: [Google]

568KB, 4000x545px

>>16866118
>nissan
>good at anything
HA

>>16866133
;_; I only spent 1500 on it

>>16866128
>disposable
What is with this disposable meme

>>16864176
Looks like mine except I have the 2.3L. Is that vista metallic blue?

File: furby.png (356KB, 572x380px) Image search: [Google]

356KB, 572x380px

>>16864074
>tfw we can't express pride in what we drive

File: 1489388379737.png (113KB, 1440x956px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 1440x956px

>>16866329
This. It's not being a ford fanboy, it's standing up for the humble ranger, a truck that gets unwarranted bad press.

>>16857776
>>16857782
You're both wrong. The Duratec/MZI V6 was developed by Porsche and Cosworth.

File: holy_pepe.jpg (178KB, 888x1120px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 888x1120px

>>16866355
Such true words fellow ranger bro. And a rare ford ranger pepe with wojak driving? Holy kek, saved.

File: 1445982182861.png (59KB, 500x382px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 500x382px

>>16866463
Rangers gotta stick together

File: 1998_ford_ranger_splash_extended_cab_pickup_2___door_3___0l_9_lgw.jpg (405KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

405KB, 1600x1200px

>mfw FX4 Rangers are dipping below $3500 now in South Ontario

All three generations of the Ranger and fox platform are the only Fords I've ever really liked. I should really ask my brother to text me a picture every time he puts gas in his 07 FX4 Level ii auto to try to stop myself and just get a 3.0 2WD 5Spd Extended cab third gen Ranger that would be more than enough and in far better condition at that price.

>that moment when you're driving an extended cab third gen at night and you hit a bump and the interior light comes on from a shitty door latch.

Ranger is love, ranger is life <3

File: 1396059306401.jpg (570KB, 1716x1140px) Image search: [Google]

570KB, 1716x1140px

>>16867286

File: A4PrxGE.png (111KB, 949x609px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 949x609px

>>16867295

File: 1400281394220.gif (1MB, 1500x1100px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1500x1100px

>>16867305
There's a first gen manual turbo diesel single cab long bed that goes up on Kijiji every year or so in Ontario. Last time I think it was $4000

>>16853537
>ford rust
>engine is just .... meeehhhhhh
>mpg not that good
>interior boring shit
Other than that, I like them. I'd rather buy a hardbody and get like 30mpg, but I like the ranger for the most part.

>>16867318
>hardbody
>30mpg
Never
Youre lucky if it will start.

>>16867320
I've owned three. NEVER had an issue with the KA. They get 30 highway broheem. Sorry you mad.

>>16867318
>implying hardbodys don't rust

>>16867318
Hardbody is an unreliable turd.
Fuck those things

>>16867311
buy that shit niqqa

>>16867375
>do the timing chain every 120k
>belts every 60k
That's it. How cheap are you that you can't do maintenance?

>>16867365
>implying literally almost every vehicle doesn't rust
The ford was PRONE to rusting more than the average car due the the shitty metal they used (see toyota also). The nissans rust but they weren't PRONE to rusting. I work at a nissan shop, they come in all the time. Rust is rarely an issue unless it's some abused POS one. I have seen one with a cracked frame and it was rusting from there. But it was owned by a nig so big surprise they didn't get it fixed.

File: M12135.6.jpg (137KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 640x480px

Anyone rocking the Bright Calypso Metallic life?

File: Bjt4XRN.jpg (232KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 1500x1000px

>>16867431
sex

>>16867431
>Tfw shitty late 90s ford white paint

>>16867474
I feel it, the Calypso is shit paint as well and had to repaint the hood, which made that color code stupid to find/buy

>>16853537
Truck.

Any other questions?

>>16867583
Yes. Why do you have such shit taste?

>>16853712
Usually it is manual 6 cylinder truck.

>>16854096
Why would anyone buy non OEM spark plugs? Stick with Motorcraft

>>16867403
>timing chain eats through front cover at about 90k
>nissan thought it was a good idea to run coolant through the front cover
Suddenly coolant in the oil
>coil pack constantly fails
>distributor fails
>injectors fail
>maf fails
>speed sensor fails
>whole gauge cluster fails
>dash disintegrates
>door panels rot ofd
>seats are just metal frames
>seat frames crack
>oil leaks everywhere
>wont go into 4x4
>gets 15mpg
>ecu fried
>iacv stops working
>PS leaks
I can go on and on.
Those hardbodies are fucking shit. Every single one ive seen has these issues and they are under 200k miles
Fuck you and your scumbag delusions.

You can't fit a family in there
You can't do 200 km/h
Fuel costs are very high
In my country, taxation would be very high because it's so heavy
Anything in the back will be stolen in due time

>>16869083
I can fit a family of 5 in mine easily
I can do 115mp/h (close to 200kmh)
I get close to 30mpg highway
Sorry your country is cucked but that's not the trucks fault
Camper shells aren't very expensive

>>16870063
>Ranger
>115 mph
lol, pick one

also
>mp/h
Eurofag pretending to be American spotted.

>>16870079
Mine is a 2010, it's pretty fast
I lived in Europe for 6 years, fuck off

>>16870132
There is not a single fucking Ranger ever made that could hit 30 mpg. Nor can you fit 5 people in any Ranger unless the truck is an extended cab, and 3 of the 5 people are under the age of 5. Nor is there one ever made that can hit 115. Not one. Not even fucking close. Fact is, your 2010 is a full 20 mph SLOWER than 115. They're governed to 95. So you're triple full of shit.

>>16870182
Are you surprised that ford fags lie?

>>16870190
I'm a fag for Ford's, and I really miss my Ranger. I agree with OP that they are the best damned small truck ever made. But I'm also a realist. They have their limitations. They get mediocre gas mileage at best, they are ungodly small, and they are slow. But those three points aren't the reason the Ranger existed. Don't make the truck out to be something it's not. Just let it bask in the glory of what it is.

>>16870182
I4 manuals in good shape can EASILY get 30mpg. Stop lying.

>>16870309
No they don't. The V6 Ecoboost in the F150 got better mileage than the 4 cylinder Ranger. That was the entire reason Ford killed off the Ranger. It was bringing the Corporate Average Fuel Economy down.

>>16870182
The governor is set to 110 on modern rangers
http://www.ranger-forums.com/4-0l-ohv-sohc-v6-tech-33/max-speed-your-ranger-136292/

>>16870329
Lies. I've seen 30mpg with my own eyes.

>>16870182
Yes, there is. The diesel rangers in the 80s could hit 40mpg. And idk what my ranger is limited to but it definitely isn't 95, I've exceeded that before when passing a truck.

>>16870349
Did you even read the thread you posted? One single guy, unsourced, claimed 110. Everyone else, and every other document on the Internet says 95.

Personally, I never had my Ranger above 85. There's no conceivable reason to drive one faster than that.

File: Screen Shot 2017-03-20 at 4.38.17 PM.png (263KB, 1270x618px) Image search: [Google]

263KB, 1270x618px

>>16865390
congrats, your shitty truck can tow as much as a Honda mom SUV

>>16870407
The ranger probably weighs about as much as those vehicles so it's not really a shocker.

>>16870355
I stand corrected. For 4 years in the mid-80's, diesel Rangers existed. Too bad it was so brief.

I'll correct myself, there was never a gasoline Ranger that hit 30 mpg.

>>16870383
I know people who have hit 110 in there ranger

>>16870421
Stop lying. I4 rangers easily get 30mpg

i'm a fan of the ranger it isn't the best at anything but it fits my day to day better than anything else

File: 1488491526177.gif (69KB, 200x150px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 200x150px

>>16870407
truck based on 1998 Chassis

takes honda up to 2017 to catch up

nice work honda

>>16870505
They're lying.

>>16870511
I'm not lying. Learn what CAFE is.

>>16870601
So you're telling me my eyes are lying?
Also this
http://www.therangerstation.com/forums/showthread.php?t=107047

>>16870698
Did you even read that thread? One guy one time got 30 on one stretch of continuous highway driving, and even he admitted it was an anomaly.

>>16853537
Meh tier engine and transmission

>>16870528
>chassis = towing capacity

fordfags everyone

File: 7dea849f1413e3f5d58f1618f4764075.jpg (16KB, 225x300px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 225x300px

>>16853537
>6 cylinders
ishygddt

File: 110.png (227KB, 875x757px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 875x757px

>>16870383
>Did you even read the thread you posted? One single guy, unsourced, claimed 110. Everyone else, and every other document on the Internet says 95.
Get bent
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXXmAvBlEsY

>>16871270
>6-7 second 0-60
I call funny buisiness on this one

>>16871270
>>16871282
No fucking way 0-60 in 7 seconds. The guy obviously has big tires on his truck throwing the speedo off. Like many, my Ranger had 185/75r14's on it from the factory, and in the rain, it sketchy as fuck like that. Tail happy big time. I found Lincoln Town Car with some aluminum wheels in the junkyard, grabbed them along with the 225/75r15's, and it handled way, way better. The speedo was way off at that point though, but I didn't care.

>>16871282
>>16871331
Ya'll just sound salty that I proved ford rangers can go 110 mph, dude obviously just has a well maintained truck. Why would ford put the instrument console with a value up to 120 mph if it could never go over 100? That makes no sense.

>>16871343
His ranger must have something special going on because my 4.0 ohv is not that fast.

>>16871371
Maybe using ethanol free gas?

>>16871343
My Cavalier's speedo goes to 110, the car tops out at 88.
Conversely my Maxima's speedo goes to 140, the car tops out at 152(according to gps).

Speedometers are a bullshit way to judge speed.

>>16871343
Funfact: you didn't prove a fucking thing other than you've never owned a Ranger.

>>16871444
I own one, it's my only vehicle. I've driven rangers my entire life.

File: truck.jpg (105KB, 567x418px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 567x418px

OP correct god tier mini truck. Laugh to my self as i get noice mileage spin rear tires like it has power ( naaaa) and can park.

File: P1000621.jpg (3MB, 4608x3464px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4608x3464px

>>16872304
They're not fancy or modern but they do what they should without any complaints.

File: IMG_4714.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

>>16853537
They are alright. I like mine

>>16872304
Haha i was commuting home on wet streets in my beater ranger and had a bit of a pucker moment as I needed to hop out into a break in traffic and the rear end just broke loose and started hopping. Definitely a crude, low power beast but so much fun to drive around.

File: 46769657.jpg (147KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 1024x768px

why own this when you could own an s10?

File: 79320003.jpg (641KB, 1545x1024px) Image search: [Google]

641KB, 1545x1024px

Love mine.

Pic related is sudbury ontario 2015 hunting season.

>>16872632
There's a reason you still see rangers and not s10s

File: maxresdefault.jpg (99KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 1280x720px

>>16872654
because all the beans beat the hell out of them because they are actual work trucks and not fleet selloffs?

>>16872665
The fuck are you talking about? The Mexicans all drive Toyotas or rangers

>>16872765
because theyre the only ones they can get now since ford made so many fucking rangers so cheaply and toyotas were taken care of by white teenagers who wanted a truck but daddy didnt want them in a dodge because daddy learned that jap cars don't need maintenence.

>>16872405
Nice truck bro

>>16872807
Or because s-10s are trash and nobody bought them because they're trash compared to the ranger.

>ITT
>ford fags ignore all issues and still claim ranger is best
Wew

>>16872807
We got a fanboy over here guiz

>>16872765
mexicans here all drive tacos/toypus, f150s, and the occasional gm 1/2 ton

>>16873283
Mexicans here drive rangers and hardbodies.
They cant afford anything else.
>tfw you WILL be pulled over for driving these trucks
Tacomas dont get pulled over

>>16872654
>There's a reason you still see rangers and not s10s

Yeah
Because they stopped production in 04 while the ranger kept going till 2011.

>>16853565
But they are sort of okay at lots of stuff.

>>16855435
I drive 900m (slightly over half a mile) to work daily... but i take my service van home, so i can do on call work after hours. Still feels retarded when i pull up at the workshop and the low temp warning light is still on...

File: IMG_05147.jpg (2MB, 3240x2430px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3240x2430px

>>16872844
Thanks senpai, it's a beater but it's my beater.

How much would a 1988 ranger 5 speed manual with the 2.9l v6 and 130k miles be?

>>16874168
You'll be throwing money and parts into it, the relative low miles for the year means everything is just old and waiting to fail on you.
Near me that'd go for 1000$ if it's in fair shaoe

>>16874251
Alright, thank you

File: DSC01364.jpg (31KB, 270x480px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 270x480px

>>16857670
>Cyclone
Even stole the name of Mitsubishi's v6 series.

File: rangers.jpg (1019KB, 4320x2432px) Image search: [Google]

1019KB, 4320x2432px

The preferred truck of the waterfront

>>16875311
>only CHEAP fleet truck available
>preferred
Pick one

File: fords.jpg (1011KB, 4320x2432px) Image search: [Google]

1011KB, 4320x2432px

>>16875358
Mad cause S10s and Tacomas dont have what it takes to survive on the docks?

>>16875374
Sorry im not poor. I have no reason to be mad.

File: longiegatornet.jpg (631KB, 2644x1983px) Image search: [Google]

631KB, 2644x1983px

>>16875380
Really? I'm not poor (in fact I probably earn a lot more than you) and I get mad about things.

>>16875408
Insecurity is a good reason to be mad.
Maybe you should work on that

>>16875413
You seem really mad right now, actually. Are you angry because youre a low income bitch?

>>16875424
Youre trying so hard.
Its cute

>>16875427
Yeah youre for sure a minimum wage earning dork.

>>16875432
Yup, totally.
You sure got me.
I'm so devastated.
What ever will i do?
Its the end of times.
Oh lordy

Anyone remember that police pursuit a few months ago where the guy was driving a ranger? It was in some snowy state like Indiana. The ranger survived a PIT maneuver and a spike strip before the dude drove it into a ditch.

>>16875446
A lot of vehicles do that.

>>16875465
What's wrong with you?

>>16875469
Im a realist with actual knowledge and understanding of vehicles.
Not a retarded fanboy

>>16875481
Nah youre just a whiny little low income bitch. You really dont know shit about vehicles.

>>16875511
Lol. Stay ass blasted

>>16864547
There was one guy that lives near me who had a fully electric ranger. He'd drive his kid to school with it.

Then it went up in flames.