I've had both a Nissan hardbody pickup and a Ford Ranger with a 2.3 and for what it's worth I love my Ranger, but it feels heavy and slow, with an engine that has 0.7L more displacement than the Nissan. Mind you, this is me comparing a 1992, pre-Frontier model pickup with a near end of life, legacy chassis and base model engine Ford.
I always felt like American cars just couldn't match the efficiency of the lighter weight Japanese models. The 4-cylinder Nissan felt lighter and more capable than my 4-cylinder Ranger does, and for what I'd use it for, it would probably do just fine. I feel like the retort is always, "you bought the 4-banger when there are V6 options,". Exactly my point. In order to make the American truck do what the Japanese truck already did, I'd have to overcome the weight difference.
But, I live in the South where I can say things like that. My Nissan likely wouldn't have made it 5 years as an all-weather vehicle even a few hundred miles north of here. That "weight difference" is the amount of sheer steel that would hold up better longer in salty environments. Not forever, just longer. I see it a lot when Salt Belt ex-pats come down here. The junkyards are starting to get rustier vehicles as the better examples of those same running vehicles are beginning to catch a premium, especially for those who value their privacy (how
ed is this world where that's a factor in buying a car these days?).
If I had the choice to buy another '92 Hardbody I would, but I'd park it right next to my Ranger. I love how the Ranger feels like a truck. It rides like a truck and drives like a truck. The Nissan is probably the reason I'm interested in the Maverick over the new Ranger. I like that the Maverick is 30% truck and 70% boxy car. I already have a truck. A Maverick with a cap is the minivan with a dedicated cargo bay I've always wanted.
