Let's whip out our trucks and compare sizes, shall we?

"bhtooefr" (bhtooefr)
01/15/2018 at 20:07 • Filed to: Ford Ranger, Ford, Danger Ranger, Truck Yeah, Truck, Trucks, Pickup, Pickup Trucks, Pickup truck

The bulging fenders and slightly higher roof you can see behind the NA Ranger 4x4 is a New Zealand-market T6 Ranger HR 4x2 or 4x4. Behind that, much more prominently, is a 2011 F-150, I don’t know whether it’s 4x2 or 4x4.

( Edit: Turns out I had the proportions slightly wrong, and the T6 is a taller trim level, so I had to stretch it vertically. It’s still pretty small.)

( Edit 2: Turns out the US Ranger is a 4x4. Fuck it, it gets a vertical stretch.)

DISCUSSION (20)

jimz > bhtooefr
01/15/2018 at 20:17

Thank you for injecting some sense into this discussion.

ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com > bhtooefr
01/15/2018 at 20:24

Kinja'd!!!

I’m comfortable with the size of my F-150.

SilentButNotReallyDeadly...killed by G/O Media > bhtooefr
01/15/2018 at 20:27

It’s a shame that the rated payload for each of these three vehicles is not of the same proportions.

DasWauto > bhtooefr
01/15/2018 at 20:31

This is a good comparison to make but these pictures are not exactly a great representation of the truth. Both Rangers use a shot from a much wider angle lens than the F150, making the greenhouses look significantly smaller than they are. Notice how much closer the width of the windshield of the F150 is proportionally to the width of the fenders than is true of the Rangers.

Urambo Tauro > bhtooefr
01/15/2018 at 20:31

Holy crap, is that image to scale?

bhtooefr > SilentButNotReallyDeadly...killed by G/O Media
01/15/2018 at 20:37

This is going to be a bit apples-to-oranges, but...

2011 US Ranger 4.0 V6 SuperCab 4x2: 1220-1560 lbs

2018 AU Ranger 3.2 I5 TD SuperCab Pickup High Rider 4x2: 1145 kg or 2524 lbs (somehow I really, really doubt that the US truck will be that high - they may want to keep it under 6000 GVWR, too, so I suspect it’ll be in the 1500 lbs ballpark) - and yes, I used a suspension config that isn’t what I depicted, but a SuperCab 4x2 can’t be had as a Low Rider.

2011 US F-150 3.7 V6 SuperCab 4x2: 1600 lbs

2011 US F-150 5.0 V8 SuperCab 4x2: 1820 lbs

2011 US F-150 3.5 EcoBoost SuperCab 4x2: 1800-2070 lbs

bhtooefr > DasWauto
01/15/2018 at 20:47

OK, so it wasn’t far off, but...

In any case, I found that the NZ Ranger is a trim that could only be a High Rider or 4x4, and ours is going to be a High Rider anyway.

I’ve redone the image to fix the ratios and to fix that, but now I kinda want to do a 4x4 comparison - the US Ranger will be taller. and fixed the US Ranger, because it’s actually a 4x4. I’m not sure what the F-150 is, TBH.

bhtooefr > Urambo Tauro
01/15/2018 at 20:48

Turns out that it wasn’t quite , and I had a trim of the T6 that we probably won’t get, so I’ve redone it.

bhtooefr > DasWauto
01/15/2018 at 21:19

Ohhhh, I see what you mean. Yeah, it’s going to be harder to scale that properly. Everyone ignore the mirrors, they’re further out on all of these vehicles.

Carbon Fiber Sasquatch > bhtooefr
01/15/2018 at 22:21

That’s pretty remarkable really, for looking so much meatier, the new ranger really isn’t much bigger than the old one. You should do the Chevy ones too.

SilentButNotReallyDeadly...killed by G/O Media > bhtooefr
01/15/2018 at 22:43

Exactly. It’s kind of apples to oranges. But I think you get it. Just because you get a bigger truck doesn’t mean you get a better payload.

That said...as you point out the US Ranger is unlikely to have the payload capacity of the RoW Ranger. Perhaps this is the point of difference Ford USA are looking to highlight as a way of differentiating the US Ranger from the ‘inferior’ (my word but it’s Ford’s inference) RoW version.

It also explains why no-one in the RoW needs a Ford F-150 if they already have access to a Ranger or most any other mid size pick-up.

bhtooefr > Carbon Fiber Sasquatch
01/15/2018 at 23:10

I’ll do it an easier way.

Here’s the Ford trucks again, without mirrors, and no actual trucks (colors are weird):

Kinja'd!!!

Here’s the Chevys:

Kinja'd!!!

bhtooefr > SilentButNotReallyDeadly...killed by G/O Media
01/15/2018 at 23:12

Except for bed size, of course, but then most of these trucks are designed around shit like Europallets.

Carbon Fiber Sasquatch > bhtooefr
01/15/2018 at 23:26

Nice! It looks like the new Ranger is shorter than the current Colorado.

I think in this case if it’s noticeably smaller, it’s a good thing. I think Ford knows their demographic.

bhtooefr > Carbon Fiber Sasquatch
01/16/2018 at 00:10

It’s actually all relative - the base Silverado 4WD then was lower than the base F-150 4WD, and the Colorado is actually slightly lower than the new Ranger (but over an inch wider). This is, however, using Australian numbers, not US ones, for the Ranger.

CodyVella > bhtooefr
01/16/2018 at 00:44

Wondering where the 2004 Nissan Frontier factors into this. I`m currently in a 2003 Xterra because the same year Frontier is unbelievably expensive (in Canada anyways). I’ve been told the D40 Frontier isn’t that much larger than the D22 Frontier so, it HAS to be substantially smaller than the T6 Ranger.