Old Ranger vs new Ranger

[Ozuye10]

*not self promotion* I shot a video comparing the two. Let me know your thoughts on the two.

 

[sgtsandman]

As an owner of both, your assessment is fair and unfair at the same time.

The vehicle market right now is absolutely insane. Used and new. You aren't going to buy a vehicle for what is really worth, especially trucks and SUVs.

You are comparing a Regular Cab Ranger to a Supercrew Ranger. That is a very bad comparison. Now if you were to compare a Supercab to a Supercab, things would be more even. The new truck would still be taller and wider but the bed length, at least from the numbers they give us. would be the same.

On the fuel economy, no the new Ranger is not going to get you 29 mpg. It's taller, wider, and heavier. Even with a more modern engine, physics just gets in the way. The best the New Ranger can do, according to Ford is 26. I've generally had good success meeting or beating the manufacturer's estimate, not by a stellar amount but I beat it. My 2011 is supposed to get 19 highway, 17 mixed. I generally meet or beat that but it's a V6, 4X4 with a bed cap, stuff sticking into the air stream, and it isn't empty. My 2019 is supposed to get 24 highway, 22 mixed. It meets those numbers but only just. Again, bed cap, and it isn't empty.

Interior trim and comfort. There is a mixed bag with both. The 2011 is built better with better materials compared to the 2019. The extra interior room the 2019 has is nice on long trips where the 2011 can get confining. The fact that the 2011 doesn't have cruise control could be a contributing factor since I can't move my feet as much.

Rake and truck height. The rake doesn't bother me as much as the bed height does. If it came with a measurable amount of ground clearance to compensate for it, it might be more understandable but from what I remember, there isn't much of a difference and yet the bed is higher. I don't know if it is because of the springs they used or what but the tailgate is about 3-4 higher off the ground compared to the 2011 and you only get about 1" of clearance. I'm not sure a leveling kit will change that much. Plus, every time you load the truck with a big load, you'll now have a Carolina Rake.

As for the rest, I think it was pretty fair. Ford took a truck designed and made for the European market, tweaked a bit for the US market and said here you go. The Supercrew Ranger is pretty much an SUV with it's rear end chopped off. There might be a little more space, comparatively speaking but you are essentially correct. All the mid sized Crew Cab truck are like that, with the exception of maybe certain models of the Tacoma where you can get the 6 foot bed. My 2019 is ok, nothing stellar about it. I bought it to replace an SUV and it performs that function fine. It meets the mission I bought it for. If it was to replace the 2011, I would think differently.

My biggest grips with the 2019 is pretty much the same thing you are going to find in most new trucks out there. Too much integrated electronics, too many blind spots, and I think the shock dampening is to soft. The truck is aimed more at the Soccer Mom than a person looking for a work truck, at least with the Supercrew.

Other things I dislike are more of an annoyance to me than necessarily designing flaws. Lack of room for mobile radios and storing emergency equipment. Storage is just plain minuscule in the cab outside of the door pockets and center console. I think I had more room in my 1998 Regular cab.

 

[Bill]

My biggest grips with the 2019 is pretty much the same thing you are going to find in most new trucks out there. Too much integrated electronics, too many blind spots, and I think the shock dampening is to soft. The truck is aimed more at the Soccer Mom than a person looking for a work truck, at least with the Supercrew.

Other things I dislike are more of an annoyance to me than necessarily designing flaws. Lack of room for mobile radios and storing emergency equipment. Storage is just plain minuscule in the cab outside of the door pockets and center console. I think I had more room in my 1998 Regular cab.

Every new vehicle on the market is made for soccer moms. You can't find a basic vehicle with just A/C and a stock radio. The are all fully-loaded with what were options in the past and the options now are slightly different sound systems or the ability to pay a monthly subscription fee to access some option that is factory installed. You just have to pay an additional fee to enable it. The car manufacturers make the argument that this is what most consumers want. I disagree. I know there are consumers who want this stuff, but it's likely most of them don't want to pay for a lot of things they aren't going to use beyond power locks and audio. And when it comes to audio, a lot of people want the ability to customize their audio system the way they want it. And then there's there are people like me who really don't want all that stuff in a vehicle that I'm going to drive through the forests to go camping. Sometimes I think my 2007 XLT is too nice for these activities. Especially when I spend a day trying to get the dust off and out of the interior after a road trip.

 

[sgtsandman]

Every new vehicle on the market is made for soccer moms. You can't find a basic vehicle with just A/C and a stock radio. The are all fully-loaded with what were options in the past and the options now are slightly different sound systems or the ability to pay a monthly subscription fee to access some option that is factory installed. You just have to pay an additional fee to enable it. The car manufacturers make the argument that this is what most consumers want. I disagree. I know there are consumers who want this stuff, but it's likely most of them don't want to pay for a lot of things they aren't going to use beyond power locks and audio. And when it comes to audio, a lot of people want the ability to customize their audio system the way they want it. And then there's there are people like me who really don't want all that stuff in a vehicle that I'm going to drive through the forests to go camping. Sometimes I think my 2007 XLT is too nice for these activities. Especially when I spend a day trying to get the dust off and out of the interior after a road trip.

Boy you have got that right!

 

[Ozuye10]

As an owner of both, your assessment is fair and unfair at the same time.

The vehicle market right now is absolutely insane. Used and new. You aren't going to buy a vehicle for what is really worth, especially trucks and SUVs.

You are comparing a Regular Cab Ranger to a Supercrew Ranger. That is a very bad comparison. Now if you were to compare a Supercab to a Supercab, things would be more even. The new truck would still be taller and wider but the bed length, at least from the numbers they give us. would be the same.

On the fuel economy, no the new Ranger is not going to get you 29 mpg. It's taller, wider, and heavier. Even with a more modern engine, physics just gets in the way. The best the New Ranger can do, according to Ford is 26. I've generally had good success meeting or beating the manufacturer's estimate, not by a stellar amount but I beat it. My 2011 is supposed to get 19 highway, 17 mixed. I generally meet or beat that but it's a V6, 4X4 with a bed cap, stuff sticking into the air stream, and it isn't empty. My 2019 is supposed to get 24 highway, 22 mixed. It meets those numbers but only just. Again, bed cap, and it isn't empty.

Interior trim and comfort. There is a mixed bag with both. The 2011 is built better with better materials compared to the 2019. The extra interior room the 2019 has is nice on long trips where the 2011 can get confining. The fact that the 2011 doesn't have cruise control could be a contributing factor since I can't move my feet as much.

Rake and truck height. The rake doesn't bother me as much as the bed height does. If it came with a measurable amount of ground clearance to compensate for it, it might be more understandable but from what I remember, there isn't much of a difference and yet the bed is higher. I don't know if it is because of the springs they used or what but the tailgate is about 3-4 higher off the ground compared to the 2011 and you only get about 1" of clearance. I'm not sure a leveling kit will change that much. Plus, every time you load the truck with a big load, you'll now have a Carolina Rake.

As for the rest, I think it was pretty fair. Ford took a truck designed and made for the European market, tweaked a bit for the US market and said here you go. The Supercrew Ranger is pretty much an SUV with it's rear end chopped off. There might be a little more space, comparatively speaking but you are essentially correct. All the mid sized Crew Cab truck are like that, with the exception of maybe certain models of the Tacoma where you can get the 6 foot bed. My 2019 is ok, nothing stellar about it. I bought it to replace an SUV and it performs that function fine. It meets the mission I bought it for. If it was to replace the 2011, I would think differently.

My biggest grips with the 2019 is pretty much the same thing you are going to find in most new trucks out there. Too much integrated electronics, too many blind spots, and I think the shock dampening is to soft. The truck is aimed more at the Soccer Mom than a person looking for a work truck, at least with the Supercrew.

Other things I dislike are more of an annoyance to me than necessarily designing flaws. Lack of room for mobile radios and storing emergency equipment. Storage is just plain minuscule in the cab outside of the door pockets and center console. I think I had more room in my 1998 Regular cab.

I don’t disagree with the mid-size crew cabs being mall crawling SUVs. I’ve owned 3 of them and 1 full-size. I’m making more the comparison of modern vs the past and the change in direction things took.

 

[sgtsandman]

I don’t disagree with the mid-size crew cabs being mall crawling SUVs. I’ve owned 3 of them and 1 full-size. I’m making more the comparison of modern vs the past and the change in direction things took.

That's why I commented on it being designed for the European markets an soccer moms. From the right angle, it doesn't look bad but it wasn't designed with the truck enthusiast in mind, except maybe in the abstract. Most people buying vehicles of any kind are from the city and suburbia. So, that is who they cater to.

 

[HenryMac]

On the fuel economy, no the new Ranger is not going to get you 29 mpg.

Our 2019 XL / FX-4 SuperCab gets 29 mpg. I've tracked the mileage for over 30,000 miles.

 

[sgtsandman]

Our 2019 XL / FX-4 SuperCab gets 29 mpg. I've tracked the mileage for over 30,000 miles.

We have essentially the same truck, except for the cab. The best I've ever seen was 25. I wonder what we're doing different? I couldn't be the cap. That should be mpg neutral.

 

[racsan]

I wonder whats the weight difference between a 2019 s/c vs c/c? that could be some of it. I took out my bed tool box & spare tire from my ‘94 & went from 21 to 24 mpg. Might take off the tailgate next & see what that weight loss does.

 

[sgtsandman]

I wonder whats the weight difference between a 2019 s/c vs c/c? that could be some of it. I took out my bed tool box & spare tire from my ‘94 & went from 21 to 24 mpg. Might take off the tailgate next & see what that weight loss does.

There probably is. I'll have to see if the I have the weights for both handy to look up.

 

[sgtsandman]

Only 87# difference. I wonder if it's the bed length making the truck appear more sleek to the airflow?

 

[racsan]

I think sometimes even the “same” engine can be different on fuel economy between two (or more) similar trucks. Ive had (3) 2.3 lima’s, all 2wd manual, 2 were 3.73 geared and 1 is 4.10 All 3 were very different on mpg observations. The 1st was a ‘88 s/c 3.73 with stock 14’s, got 22/23 most of the time, 29 at very best (just one time though). My ‘92 was a reg cab longbed, 3.73 & stock 14’s, I think it must of had compression issues from sitting for 5 years before I got it, low power, never got above 19 mpg and that was if 5th wasnt used. If you did use 5th 17 mpg was all it had. (my 94 4.0 4x4 3.73 got 18 on a weekly basis) The ‘94 I drive is hard to compare, swapped out the 3.45 for 4.10’s and tossed the 14’s for 235/75/15. It does do a little better with 225/70/15’s, esp when towing or the ‘glass cap on. Speedometer is more accurate with the 235’s though and with the cap off in the summer it seems to be fine on power as long as theres no big hills or trailer on behind.
I do wonder if the window stickers show the same mpg ratings for the ‘19 s/c vs c/c since all chassis are the same engine/transmission/gear ratio. Ive heard conflicting information regarding a cap affecting mpg, sure its a little more weight but Ive noticed mine handling better with one, even if its the beater aluminum cap vs running without.
Wow, the ‘19 is roughly 1,000 pounds heavier than my old 94 longbed.

 

[sgtsandman]

I think sometimes even the “same” engine can be different on fuel economy between two (or more) similar trucks. Ive had (3) 2.3 lima’s, all 2wd manual, 2 were 3.73 geared and 1 is 4.10 All 3 were very different on mpg observations. The 1st was a ‘88 s/c 3.73 with stock 14’s, got 22/23 most of the time, 29 at very best (just one time though). My ‘92 was a reg cab longbed, 3.73 & stock 14’s, I think it must of had compression issues from sitting for 5 years before I got it, low power, never got above 19 mpg and that was if 5th wasnt used. If you did use 5th 17 mpg was all it had. (my 94 4.0 4x4 3.73 got 18 on a weekly basis) The ‘94 I drive is hard to compare, swapped out the 3.45 for 4.10’s and tossed the 14’s for 235/75/15. It does do a little better with 225/70/15’s, esp when towing or the ‘glass cap on. Speedometer is more accurate with the 235’s though and with the cap off in the summer it seems to be fine on power as long as theres no big hills or trailer on behind.
I do wonder if the window stickers show the same mpg ratings for the ‘19 s/c vs c/c since all chassis are the same engine/transmission/gear ratio. Ive heard conflicting information regarding a cap affecting mpg, sure its a little more weight but Ive noticed mine handling better with one, even if its the beater aluminum cap vs running without.
Wow, the ‘19 is roughly 1,000 pounds heavier than my old 94 longbed.

It is weird. HenryMac has the Supercab and I have the Supercrew, both XL/STX/FX4. So, they should be pretty close. Other than the bed cap (I think he has a toneau cover), the numbers should be similar. I'm wondering if the extra foot of bed length is the deciding factor. Even with the added weight of the fiberglass cap, the fact that it follows the body line contours and keeps the air flow smooth should offset the weight penalty. These new Ranger caps are so short anyway due to the height of the sides, weight shouldn't be that big of a penalty as opposed to the one on my 2011. Now that is a heavy sucker. I had to use an engine puller to remove it when I was troubleshooting my fuel pump issue.

 

[HenryMac]

We have essentially the same truck, except for the cab. The best I've ever seen was 25. I wonder what we're doing different? I couldn't be the cap. That should be mpg neutral.

• I use cruise control a lot, even in town.
• Always top tier premium fuel.
• And once a week I do a Tony's Tune-Up.... From a stop, gas pedal to the floor up to 80mph.
• And I drive the speed limit... except for the Tony's tune-up.

 

[racsan]

Good point, I hadnt considered the taller ‘19 bedsides would result in a shorter (and lighter) topper.