Found this at the local dealership. To be honest even its a small revision i like this look alot

 

That is looking really good, I am a huge Ranger fan!

 

nice, now weres that 2006 mustang order guide?

 

nice, i've always liked rangers, and that looks pretty sweet!

 

:shock: Looks more like a Nissan Frontier. I hope those fender flares and plastic side moldings are only an option. Sorry, this just doesn't do it for me and I've been a long time Ranger fan. It looks ugly and cheap. :notnice:

BTW, Arin...I noticed you got a II. Good for you bro. Can't wait till you drop that 351W. It's gonna be one bad ***** on the road

 

They need a major overhaul of the ranger if they want to keep control of the small pickup market.

I am going to predict this will be a more important market segment as gas prices increase.

 

thanks dude!

im gonna look for a 351W at a junkyard as soon as school gets out. and when i say as soon as school gets out i mean, when the bell reings its off to picknpull lol

 

me likey...

 

they dont need a major overhaul of the ranger. check it out. the explorer (same frame) has a 3valve 5.4 in it. 300 hp. why not put this in the ranger and say bye bye to the hemi's. it wouldn't take much to be a player in the small truck segment. com'n ford

 

Uhm the explorer has a 3 valve 4.6 liter v8 that produces 292 horsepower not a 5.4 liter in it

 

maybe he meant the aviator, i think that ones got the 5.4. But still, i don't think this pick up needs a 5.4 V8, that really goes against what Steve was suggesting. Sure the dakota's got a v8, but that things weird. "LARGEST, MOST POWERFUL COMPACT PICK UP!!" That's like someone getting into the guiness book of records for being the biggest midget.
I think the main problem with the Ranger is styling, but that's just me. I find it really dated, but i'm betting most people who buy this truck are really just looking for something functional. People looking to make a statement usually get something a lot bigger nowadays.

 

Big fan of the Ranger. My first "new" vehicle was a '92 Ranger XLT regular cab, 2wd. I got over 218,000 miles before it finally died. Over 100,000 on the first set of tires, Firestones even! No air or pwd, pwl, but I loved that truck. If I could get another Ranger, I would, but a wife, 2 kids, and a Rotweiler will put a stop to that. Oh well, guess I will have to get a F-150 quad cab.

 

im pretty sure the aviator uses the 4.6L

 

Yep... 4.6 liter 32 valve Intech engine rated at 302 hp and 300 lb./ft of torque.

 

I think the Aviator has the best engine (second best looks) in the entire FoMoCo SUV lineup (right ahead of the Expedition [best looks, second best engine] with the new 5.4L 3Valve). Too bad they didn't give it a low range, otherwise it would be perfect.

 

i like that they put the grille of its bigger brothers on it. and the two tone cladding...nice!

 

Rangers need more power, my dad is in the market for a compact pickup and noted toyota's 2.7L 4cly matched and slightly beat the Ranger 3.0 in hp @ torque, all while being priced lower.
He agrees the Toyota is ugly as sin, but wants function over form. I guess it just put me in a point where I was ashamed at Ford. Still a strong supporter though.

 

Yes, you are correct about the engine specs but heres some other info I found.

Toyota Tacoma failed the NHTSA rollover test for 2004 and...

Ranger 04 recalls: 0

I did check base pricing on Edmunds and they are almost identical.


Ultimately you're Dad should get what he wants though no matter what it may be, I just thought I would share. Good luck

 

Rangers are nice trucks, but they need optional V8. If Dakota can have V8, I don't see the reason why Ranger can't.

 

Great info, I too want the Ranger really bad. I think seeing a Shiny Ranger at the lot VS a Tacoma on its lot can make an impact. We are test driving both as well. He also mentioned the greater towing and carrying capabilites from the Tacoma, man we'll see what happens.