Ranger MPG

"Carbon Fiber Sasquatch" (turbopumpkin) 11/16/2018 at 20:02 • Filed to: None

0

32

Anyone else think it's strange that we know almost everything about the US spec Ford Ranger except the MPG? I have a feeling it's because it doesn't do much better than the 2.7 F150. Thoughts?

jimz > Carbon Fiber Sasquatch 11/16/2018 at 20:05

8

they can’t publish anything until the EPA accepts their certification evidence packet.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > Carbon Fiber Sasquatch 11/16/2018 at 20:12

2

Interesting to see Ford bringing back the MPG trim level.

CB > Carbon Fiber Sasquatch 11/16/2018 at 20:20

2

What JimZ said. Also, I’m with you in that the mileage won’t be great.

gmporschenut also a fan of hondas > Carbon Fiber Sasquatch 11/16/2018 at 20:22

1

its a tall brick, so i dont think its going to be great. 

Tapas > Carbon Fiber Sasquatch 11/16/2018 at 20:24

0

The old F150 is rebodied as the new Ranger.

At least it seems so, from it's size.

Pr ove me wrong.

KingT- 60% of the time, it works every time > Carbon Fiber Sasquatch 11/16/2018 at 20:34

1

Speaking of the Ranger I saw this today :

To sign up for a Ford drive event near you to see, touch and drive the new Ranger, you can go to the automaker’s website and register for one of the remaining 16 tour stops that hit California, Texas, Arizona, Georgia and Florida. And don’t be surprised if you get pulled out for a few quick comments about what you liked or didn’t like about the Ranger as organizers collect impressions with an on-site video crew.

Here are 2019 Ford Ranger drive event dates that may be near you:

Nov. 15-18: Charlotte Auto Show, Charlotte, N.C.

Nov. 15-18: San Antonio Auto Show, San Antonio

Nov. 17-18: Seventh Annual Sand, Water & RV Expo, Lake Havasu City, Ariz.

Nov. 21-25: San Francisco Auto Show, San Francisco

Nov. 22-25: Central Florida Auto Show, Orlando, Fla.

Nov. 22-25: Phoenix Auto Show, Phoenix

Nov. 30-Dec. 9: Los Angeles Auto Show, Los Angeles

Nov. 30-Dec. 2: International Off Road & UTV Expo, Scottsdale, Ariz.

Dec. 1-2: BFGoodrich Tires Unlimited Off-Road Show: Winter Wonderland, Cummings, Ga.

Dec. 6-9: Fort Worth Auto Show, Fort Worth, Texas

Dec. 7-9: Cape Coral Outdoor Expo & Boat Show, Cape Coral, Fla.

Dec. 15: Somerton Tamale Festival, Somerton, Ariz.

Dec. 15-16: Traders Village, Grand Prairie, Texas

Dec. 22-23: Traders Village, Houston

Dec. 22-23: Desert Sky Mall, Phoenix

Dec. 27-30: San Diego Auto Show, San Diego

someassemblyrequired > Carbon Fiber Sasquatch 11/16/2018 at 20:37

2

Difficulties converting L/100km to MPG?

ranwhenparked > Tapas 11/16/2018 at 20:51

0

The crew cab/short bed Ranger is supposedly 211 inches long, stem to stern, which is still over 2 inches shorter than the shortest 12th gen F-150 (which, I assume, would have been a single cab/short bed).

Though, that does make it slightly longer than the shortest available  version of the current F-150, but I doubt anybody really buys those anymore.

BrianGriffin thinks “reliable” is just a state of mind > Carbon Fiber Sasquatch 11/16/2018 at 20:52

0

Well. The F150 does roughly 17-18mpg combined. The Ranger likely does 20mpg combined, same as the Colorado. 

ranwhenparked > Carbon Fiber Sasquatch 11/16/2018 at 20:52

1

At any rate, we all know EPA EcoBoost ratings are purely for advertising purposes anyway. 

MM54 > Carbon Fiber Sasquatch 11/16/2018 at 20:57

4

“Shit, this gets worse mileage than the old Ranger, what do we do?”
“Just don’t tell anyone and they won’t notice”

Tapas > ranwhenparked 11/16/2018 at 21:00

0

What about overall length and width though?

HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 11/16/2018 at 21:03

2

MASTER PENIS GIANT 

ranwhenparked > Tapas 11/16/2018 at 21:15

1

Width should be 211 inches for the one that most people will buy, crew cab/short bed, width is supposed to be 86 inches.

F-150 SuperCab   6.5ft bed: 231.9 inches LOA/79.9 inches wide

Ranger SuperCab 6ft bed: 210 inches LOA/85.8 inches wide

So, the Ranger is somehow going to be considerably wider, but noticeably shorter. 

jimz > MM54 11/16/2018 at 21:43

0

there’s no way this gets worse mileage than the old Ranger. My daily is a 2011 Sport 4x4, and at best it gets 18.5.  Winter, 16. 

Tapas > ranwhenparked 11/16/2018 at 21:51

0

Iam a noob when it co mes to trucks.   6 inches wide and and foot and a half short is not significantly shorter or significantly wider. But its sufficiently  different I guess for the rest the world and Ford. 

ranwhenparked > Tapas 11/16/2018 at 22:11

1

Well, lengthwise, that would be the difference between three size classes in passenger car terms. The difference is greater than what separates the Impala from the Cruze sedan.

Which, probably speaks to how pathetically small full-size cars have become, more than anything. Or, how crazy large compact cars have become, either way. 

Carbon Fiber Sasquatch > jimz 11/16/2018 at 22:50

0

Makes sense, I'm sure they're trying their damndest to make sure that it does better and is accepted by the EPA 

PanchoVilleneuve ST > Carbon Fiber Sasquatch 11/16/2018 at 23:41

0

I can’t get over how cheap that grille looks.

Gerry197 > Carbon Fiber Sasquatch 11/17/2018 at 00:16

0

Considering there is no V6 that can fit into the T6 Ranger, we are stuck with 4-cylinder turbos or maybe a 5-cylinder diesel in the future.

You can’t really use the international market Ranger to guess mpg because the prominent engine Worldwide is the 2.2L Diesel.

Also, the gas engine used is mostly the 2.5L Mazda, which is a non- turbo.

The US T6 will us an EcoBoost I4 2.3L exclusively. The closest thing we have that uses that motor in terms of weight is the Ford Explorer, which averages slight ly more heavier than the Ranger. It gets 27 mph highway, so I suspect the Ranger should get something similar.

Though that’s going to be hard to beat a F150 2.7L Ecoboost. Which can get up to 26 mpg in 2WD configuration and do 0-60 in 5.7 seconds in giant Supercrew 4x4 form.  Seriously a great motor that would have been great in the Ranger Raptor, to bad it won’t fit.        

Gerry197 > Carbon Fiber Sasquatch 11/17/2018 at 00:16

0

Considering there is no V6 that can fit into the T6 Ranger, we are stuck with 4-cylinder turbos or maybe a 5-cylinder diesel in the future.

You can’t really use the international market Ranger to guess mpg because the prominent engine Worldwide is the 2.2L Diesel.

Also, the gas engine used is mostly the 2.5L Mazda, which is a non- turbo.

The US T6 will us an EcoBoost I4 2.3L exclusively. The closest thing we have that uses that motor in terms of weight is the Ford Explorer, which averages slight ly more heavier than the Ranger. It gets 27 mph highway, so I suspect the Ranger should get something similar.

Though that’s going to be hard to beat a F150 2.7L Ecoboost. Which can get up to 26 mpg in 2WD configuration and do 0-60 in 5.7 seconds in giant Supercrew 4x4 form.  Seriously a great motor that would have been great in the Ranger Raptor, to bad it won’t fit.        

Gerry197 > BrianGriffin thinks “reliable” is just a state of mind 11/17/2018 at 00:20

0

Depends on the engine and configuration, the 2.7L is rated for 20/26, I think 23 mpg combine.

I’m currently averaging 22.5 mpg with mine on fuelly, my old Ranger 4.0L is at 19 mpg.

My VW CC 2.0T on the same commute was only 25.5 mpg.  Talk about progress right.  

Dhdesign > Carbon Fiber Sasquatch 11/17/2018 at 09:35

0

With all the gas guzzling 12 to 14 MPG performance cars being sold. Why is the ranger’s MPG important. I don’t think it’s going to end our use of fossil fuel because it uses so much. The EPA target for manufacturers are averaged over all vehicles they sell. Fo r some reason, the EPA is important for the Ranger. Don’t buy it if it doesn’t fit your criteria.

Mort > ranwhenparked 11/17/2018 at 10:41

0

Not entirely true, I have a 2017 Fusion Sport with the 2.7 turbo, it’s rated at 17 city, 26 hwy , 20 combined. I average 22 driving to work which is all city and 30 on the hwy with cruise set at 78. I drive it pretty hard too.

jimz > Tapas 11/17/2018 at 11:03

3

The new Ranger is a bit larger than the old one, but the old one was encroaching on “mid-size” territory itself. The new one looks huge for a few reasons IMO:

- availability of a crew cab (old Ranger didn’t have one here)

- longer nose to fit the 5-cylinder diesel

- rides higher, is taller, and has higher belt line/bed sides.

I’ve driven a couple of 2019 Rangers (one Crew Cab and one supercab) and they do feel and handle significantly smaller than an F-150.  remember that cars/trucks are universally bigger than they were a couple of decades ago.

Tapas > jimz 11/17/2018 at 11:41

0

This makes sense now.

Thank you!

Matt > Gerry197 11/17/2018 at 15:24

0

The ranger has the advantage of the new 10 speed auto over the explorers six speed, and they probably weigh about the same. I’d expect the ranger to do a little better than the explorer.

( edit: why am I grey here?)

The Ghost of Oppo > jimz 11/17/2018 at 16:52

0

Don’t jinx it

The Compromiser > Carbon Fiber Sasquatch 11/17/2018 at 18:47

0

Sawesome one yesterday in Dearborn. Not as small as I'd thought, but not as big as it could be?

Wheelerguy > KingT- 60% of the time, it works every time 11/18/2018 at 00:49

0

bhtooefr > Gerry197 12/09/2018 at 09:40

0

Explorer is transverse FWD-based , though, which has lower losses than a longitudinal RWD platform...

Gerry197 > bhtooefr 12/09/2018 at 10:54

0

True, though it is going RWD on the next platform which the future Ranger (and possibly VW Amarok) will ride on.

Though it’s all a mute point, I think the mpg was recently released by accident, I think 21 city / 26 highway. The same highway as a F150 2.7L V6 but 1 mpg lower than a Explorer 2.3L I4 .