![]() 07/08/2016 at 15:04 • Filed to: Ford, Ranger | ![]() | ![]() |
That moment when you find yourself parked beside and looking up to a Ford Ranger. It’s a diesel. It’s a manual. What more do you want?
Yes, it’s got the 2.2 four from the Transit. There’s a 3.2 five as well but few are sold because waste of money and diesel.
![]() 07/08/2016 at 15:10 |
|
I feel none of the jelly.
![]() 07/08/2016 at 15:11 |
|
feel it
![]() 07/08/2016 at 15:15 |
|
huh, didn’t realize they made a 2.2 version. We are getting the ranger here soon, but I am REALLY doubting we will be getting the 3.2 duratorq (not EPA compliant for this category of truck)...maybe the 2.2, but I doubt that too since it would be underpowered for the US market.
![]() 07/08/2016 at 15:22 |
|
They made turbo diesel rangers for the US in the 80s.
![]() 07/08/2016 at 15:41 |
|
They’d have to do something like a 2.2 because a big engine just won’t sell.
The 2.2 is the only engine you can get in a Transit here (there’s a choice of power outputs but that’s all) and the six speed manual is the only option.
![]() 07/08/2016 at 15:43 |
|
you mean in the US? or there? Cause here only the big engines sell.
![]() 07/08/2016 at 15:47 |
|
“....you can get in a Transit here ”...
Everywhere in Europe so far as I know.
Americans get only automatic Transits with big engines so far as I know but that wouldn’t work on my side of the pond.
![]() 07/08/2016 at 15:47 |
|
I meant the first part of your comment, but yeah that makes sense.
![]() 07/08/2016 at 15:48 |
|
I feel nothing.
![]() 07/08/2016 at 15:54 |
|
Drove some in Mexico DF. Me like-a them a lot! (not sure if diesel doe)
![]() 07/14/2016 at 16:10 |
|
In the U.S., a Ford Ranger is a dreadful little pick-up truck. Robust and dependable, perhaps, but perfectly dreadful in every aspect of appearance and comfort.
![]() 07/14/2016 at 16:12 |
|
For me, it’s a big, ugly contraption that’s getting bigger and uglier with each incarnation.