2019 Ford Ranger Payload?
- Thread starter erstwild
- Start date
Clutch
<---Pass
Basing my guess off the Lincoln CUV with the same engine. Assuming HWY will be higher, but over-all average could be 25.
https://www.lincoln.com/luxury-crossovers/mkc/features/performance/
Wallygator
Adventurer
I agree but only if it's on the level of build quality as the Australian version. Most manufacturers water down the US versions, for example the Hilux vs the Tacoma. Not even close to the same level of tough or capability in the Tacoma
tacollie
Glamper
25 seems like a reach to me. Maybe 25 at 65mph which would be awesome in my mind. Even if the Ranger is watered down it will probably be the best midsize option(I am not a GM person, kind of like I don't like tomatoes). I've has 4 tacos, 2 4runners, and a frontier as my last vehicles. The new Ranger it's the first non Japanese vehicle to great my attention.
Clutch
<---Pass
Going by my metric...99.9% of my driving is 65 and under.
My last tank in the Taco was 19.8, just by switching to street tires. Almost a 3 mpg increase by taking the AT's off. Which has me thinking a non-modded Ranger should be able to get 25 maybe a little better under my thumb.
Believe many die-hard Toyota fans are giving the Ranger a good hard look. Getting tired of Toyota resting on its' laurels.
I don't think most F-150 owners are getting anywhere close to 21 mpg overall with that 5.0l v8.
If the Ranger with the ecoboost can get anything close to 21-22mpg in combined driving, I think that will be a good step forward within the gasoline midsized truck segment. I have high hopes for this engine and the overall vehicle, but I won't be the least bit surprised if the real world mpg #'s are somewhat lower than the EPA's ratings (that's how the 3.5l v6 ecoboost turned out). And if Ford decides to offer a diesel option (either the tried-and-true 3.2l inline 5 or the 2.0l inline 4) I'd expect them to rival the Colorado's #'s (25 mpg combined).
MattF350
Observer
Thats literally the only way to do it.
Todd780
OverCamper
Maybe not. My commute is ideal for fuel consumption though. No stop and go, set the cruise etc... plus I don't drive my truck hard.
Even still for a truck with 3:73's I thought 21 was...'okay'... I had a 2000 Suburban with a 5.3L and 4:10's and it would get about 21. So I thought that a 15 year newer truck with better gearing and two more cogs in the transmission (plus a lightweight aluminum body,lol) would do a little better than a Suburban from 15 years ago.
Clutch
<---Pass
Mine too...95-98% of the commute is interstate with the cruise set at 65.
F150 2.7 4WD Ecoboost can get 22-23 hwy. Believe the Ranger will do a little better, but not by much. Wouldn't be too upset if I am wrong though!
Todd780
OverCamper
I guess time will tell and we'll see. 2 fewer cylinders, looks a little more aerodynamic, less weight to haul around than an F150...Mine too...95-98% of the commute is interstate with the cruise set at 65.
F150 2.7 4WD Ecoboost can get 22-23 hwy. Believe the Ranger will do a little better, but not by much. Wouldn't be too upset if I am wrong though!
The ironic part is I'd give up a MPG or two to have a N/A V6 gas pot under the hood instead of the turbo 4. (K.I.S.S. , lol....)
Clutch
<---Pass
Given that the engine is already in a CUV and rated to get 20city/27hwy. Don't think we are going to see much improvement over the F150.
The 3.3 N/A V6 would be a great engine in there. Guessing Ford doesn't want to undercut themselves. Or just market BS, telling us what we need to buy.
Todd780
OverCamper
Could be? Maybe down the line they'll announce an engine option? I'm guessing if that's the case it'll be a Ranger Raptor only engine. I'm thinking it'll end up being the 2.3 and possibly a diesel? I don't think most other midsize trucks have any gas engine options either?
GM = 3.6L V6, Nissan = 4.0L V6, Toyota = 3.5L V6 (Pretty sure you can only get a 4cyl in access cabs...)
Clutch
<---Pass
You would think in this day and age where we have a staggering amount of choices. Just look at the craft beer explosion as one example...almost too many choices!
...you would think we would have more engine choices. Though in this day and age with ever tightening regulations and manufactures trimming the fat. I can understand why we don't.
DaveInDenver
Middle Income Semi-Redneck
And it's substantially Australian conceptually compared to the Tacoma, which is pretty much an American truck now. I've had an American truck, which is why I bought a Toyota. The irony is it was a Ford that was the final straw and it's a Ford now that piqued my interested.