2019 Ford Ranger Taking Orders
- Thread starter erstwild
- Start date
Todd780
OverCamper
Looks like some fuel economy numbers came out to any interested:
https://carbuzz.com/news/leaked-2019-ford-ranger-fuel-economy-figures
https://carbuzz.com/news/leaked-2019-ford-ranger-fuel-economy-figures
Clutch
<---Pass
Thanks! About what I was guesstimating. Believe Ford has a winner here.
Wallygator
Adventurer
Ford's real world mileage is usually lower than the EPA estimates. In comparison there are some getting close to 40 mpg highway in the Colorado diesel. The diesel doesn't come into it's own until it is broken in which takes time. So if the EPA ran it's estimates off of a new diesel they are not accurate. Also all the tech on that Ford motor just makes me nervous. My mom had a first year 2.3 ecoboost and it was a nightmare. It was so bad she traded it for a normally aspirated Ford. I'm sure the bugs are worked out by now but not sure if the ecoboost is worth the chance.
plainjaneFJC
Deplorable
Head gaskets?
Clutch
<---Pass
Toyota has a reliability reputation which took years to build. Only way to see if the Ford is any good, is going to take years and a bunch of miles.
plainjaneFJC
Deplorable
I was on a 100 mile road trip to the lake this morning. Commented to my passenger how you rarely see broke down cars like you did in the old days. Reliability has gotten a lot better across the board IMO.
Clutch
<---Pass
See vehicles broken along side the road all the time here. Mostly 3/4-1 ton diesels...
But yeah, reliability has gotten a lot better. Was watching a TFL video where they are talking to the Ford reps, even said that is what Toyota has and they don't. Going to take some time to build public trust.
Toyota doesn't seem to be too worried about the new comers hurting sales, they are building a third plant to boost Tacoma and Tundra production.
Last edited:
Sleeping Bear
Member
I saw the Ranger at expo east and it is a fine looking truck. When it comes to mid size trucks there are two I like more than any other:
1. New Honda Ridgeline - drives and feels like a car, absolutely fantastic ride, but probably wouldn't make a good overland vehicle for any serious off road driver, but I don't know, just a guess. It has AWD with a switch for snow, sand, etc. If they made an AT Habitat camper for the ridgeline I'd be buying one today since I don't do hardly any off roading I would consider technical.
2. Chevy Colorado - I just like the extra option of the auto 4wd / AWD on the switch. In the winter, I can just set that switch and forget it - very nice.
I know of no other midsize truck that has an auto 4wd or AWD option which is why I like the Ridgeline and Colorado.
1. New Honda Ridgeline - drives and feels like a car, absolutely fantastic ride, but probably wouldn't make a good overland vehicle for any serious off road driver, but I don't know, just a guess. It has AWD with a switch for snow, sand, etc. If they made an AT Habitat camper for the ridgeline I'd be buying one today since I don't do hardly any off roading I would consider technical.
2. Chevy Colorado - I just like the extra option of the auto 4wd / AWD on the switch. In the winter, I can just set that switch and forget it - very nice.
I know of no other midsize truck that has an auto 4wd or AWD option which is why I like the Ridgeline and Colorado.
23 mpg combined for the 4x2 is about what I would expect from a turbo inline 4 gasoline truck engine.
As others have noted, the real-world mpg for these ecoboost engines tends to be a bit lower than the EPA ratings. Also, these 'leaked' figures are for the 4x2. I'd expect the 4x4 to be somewhere around 21-22mpg combined....that's decent, but certainly nothing groundbreaking in the efficiency department.
I'm not complaining though. Excepting the 2.8l diesel in the GM Colorado/Canyon, there has been a lack of significant innovation in the midsized truck engine category. This turbo gasoline engine is a welcome addition, even if it only offers a moderate improvement in mpg.
I really hope Ford brings in an optional 2.2l inline 4 or the 3.2l inline 5 diesel at some point. That would really enhance the consumer choices for the midsized truck segment.
As others have noted, the real-world mpg for these ecoboost engines tends to be a bit lower than the EPA ratings. Also, these 'leaked' figures are for the 4x2. I'd expect the 4x4 to be somewhere around 21-22mpg combined....that's decent, but certainly nothing groundbreaking in the efficiency department.
I'm not complaining though. Excepting the 2.8l diesel in the GM Colorado/Canyon, there has been a lack of significant innovation in the midsized truck engine category. This turbo gasoline engine is a welcome addition, even if it only offers a moderate improvement in mpg.
I really hope Ford brings in an optional 2.2l inline 4 or the 3.2l inline 5 diesel at some point. That would really enhance the consumer choices for the midsized truck segment.
plainjaneFJC
Deplorable
Unleaded was 1.99 gallon, diesel was 2.93 a gallon today. If a gas motor gets 21mpg you would need the diesel to get 32mpg and that still leaves you in the hole for initial cost, increased maintenance, and extremely expensive repairs out of warranty. I doubt Ford will go with a diesel in the Ranger, I'd be surprised if the 2.8 colorado sticks around more than a few years. Chevy could put that 2.7 turbo 4 from the silverado in its place.
The price discrepancy isn't that bad in many other parts of the country. But everyone has to figure out for themselves whats "worth it." For me I'm fine with paying a little extra for diesel fuel because of the efficiency/range advantages and driving characteristics. And when you take into account that some of these newer turbo and Hemi gasoline engines recommend 89 octane or better, the price difference for diesel isn't that much more, if at all.
I'd be surprised if Ford doesn't introduce a diesel option. The groundwork has already been laid: they have a handle on the emissions technology with their 1/2 ton's and 3/4 ton's. The 3.2l inline 5 is already used stateside in the Ford van. GM's 2.8l diesel has been selling well enough, and it seems that many companies see the potential for consumer demand. Why else would Jeep, FCA, Ford, GM and Nissan be introducing diesels into market segments which previously lacked them?
PS: Also, I'd like to know where you're regularly finding unleaded gasoline for $1.99. That's far lower than the national average, so it isn't really a good basis for comparison.
Clutch
<---Pass
Initial cost isn't too bad on the diesel Colorado, prices have come down.
https://www.cars.com/for-sale/searc...lse&sort=price-lowest&stkTypId=28880&zc=83605
Would love to try one, it is the out of warranty repair that makes me leery. Currently driving nearly 30K/Y, would be out of warranty real quick. But on the other hand, I run 91 regardless. Compared to diesel, prices are usually close to one another. Sometimes high test is more than diesel here. Would see fuel savings faster than the average Joe. Of course would loose that the first costly repair. So pretty much a wash.
plainjaneFJC
Deplorable
I'm in the former oil capital of the world, fuel is always cheaper than average here.