Ranger last day of production

That's too bad. I've had two, an '04 3L that I just traded in for a '10 4L with only 5K on it (apparently it was a deal Ford had, don't like it and we'll buy it back which they did). I'd had no complaints other than the 3L being underpowered.
Mind you, saying that, the power train is Mazda which my ex and daughter ownsa Protege and a Tribute with no probs neither.....Mike

I've had 2. An 85 w/the 2.8L V6 auto w/the solid lifters and an 88 4x4 5sp w/a much quieter & more powerful 3L V6. Both were great small trucks that I worked well about their designs.
I ran both ovewr 100k miles. My SIL's dad has one w/over 200k on it.
I hate to see another us plant close, it's just not a good thing.

I've seen other press releases that also indicate that the last white Rangers were destined to Orkin Pest control as they had, at one time a huge contract for them.

Also seen where the new Ranger thats being offered everywhere but here & Canada will be bigger, not as big as an F150 but close enough to where Ford didn't want it eating into the F150's sales, hense it's demise here....

Does everyone recall that the 1st Rangers were actually F100's, which was the basic no frills F150 in it's day?

Nice pics of the last of the American made rangers Boyd.

I don't get why they stopped producing them. With gas prices going up and so many people buying small trucks, wouldn't they want to keep making them? Not to mention a lot of companies use the ranger.
At the moment, the only american company producing small trucks is GM. Dodge is ending the Dakota, and Ford ended the Ranger.

Do you think Ford will end up making another small truck soon? It seems without the ranger they'll be a huge hole in the market.

mowerbeast said:

Do you think Ford will end up making another small truck soon? It seems without the ranger they'll be a huge hole in the market.

Click to expand...

Boyd said:

There is an all new design Ranger being produced in 3 plants around the world but its cost and a weak dollar is keeping it from being sold in the US.

Click to expand...

Here's a photo:

it is too bad ford cut production of the ranger line , but personally i think it was better then starting production of the new version of the ranger in the usa , the new version is kind of ugly , plus the only thing it has in common with the orginal ranger is the name , i have owned two rangers a 1992 2wd extra cab 3.0l v6 5 speed sold as of 3 years ago , currently i have a 1989 4wd 2.9l v6 5 speed extra cab , they both are the best trucks i have ever owned , goodbye old friend i salute you:trink39:

Seems kind of dumb and sad,to see Ford dropping the Ranger from their line up--dont seem sensible to me,when we need more fuel efficient trucks now more than ever!..guess they want to give Toyota all the sales??...

I thought about Boyd as soon as I saw the story on the TV news about the demise of the Ranger....

I hope they do make some replacement for the Ranger--I never cared much for Chevy
S-10's or the Colorado pickups,even though they are "OK" I guess..the Dakotas were a decent truck,bigger than a mini truck but smaller than full sized,they held up well..

I suppose we'll never see any of the diesel powered small trucks they sell overseas,thanks to the insane cost of diesel fuel compared to gas..pretty strange when an american manufacturer wont (or cant?) sell a vehicle they produce here,where its needed more than ever..

I've found alittle more info via google searches.
Seems sales of the Ranger has been dropping steadily while the F150 has held steady. Also, it seems the new V6 Ecoboost in the F150 gets the same MPG as the top of the line Ranger V6, with alot more power and of course more everything else in the F150.
I'm no wall street wizard nor do I make a living projecting car sales but likes been already touched on, a small diesel powered pickup would make a killing in our markets if the price of diesel was atleast competitive w/gasoline.

They have only been selling 55,000 Rangers the last 2 years. In 99 they sold 350,000 Rangers. Half way through the 2001 model year they dropped the old German designed 2.5 4 cylinder and installed a Mazda designed 2.3 4 cylinder 16 valve with 135hp. Its hp was upped to 143 around 2004. The 3.0 and 4.0 V6 are Ford engines. Around 2008 they dropped the 3.0 V6. Around 2009 they stopped making the Mazda B2300 B3000 B4000 versions. 2008 was the last year they listed a longbed regular cab in the dealer brochure but sold them in fleet sales or if you special ordered one. My 2009 is a longbed. 2010 they added roll stability control, upper side air bags and rear disc brakes. A lot of people have had trouble with their rear drum brakes not engaging until 1/2 second after a 50% brake application. I have also encountered that. There are companies that sell kits to install rear disc brakes on the Ranger. Online I found instructions to use 94-04 Mustang V6/GT rear disc brake setup on a Ranger by only modifying the caliper brackets. As soon as I have the $$$ I will replace the rear axle on my 2004 and install Mustang disc brakes on it. If I like it I will do the same to the rear of my 09 after it is past warranty. I would love to have a selectable locking rear differential but they are ony offered for the 8.8" rear which came in the 4x4 Rangers. My 04 & 09 are both 4x2 and have the 7.5" rear axle. The anti-lock brakes and speedometer work off of a tone ring that is in the rear axle of these trucks. Both my trucks are 2.3 4 cylinder. With my mixed in town rural driving I get 23mpg without a.c. off,, 21 with a.c. on and off,, 18 with it on all the time. With no topper or cruise control my 04 got 30.93 mpg on a trip deep into Wisconsin in January of 2008. I filled up at the same exact pump at the beginning and end of that trip. Some 4 cylinder Rangers have achieved 33-35 mpg highway with a topper on them.

With gas prices going up and so many people buying small trucks, wouldn't they want to keep making them?

Click to expand...

If you buy a Ranger, you don't buy it for mileage at least not the 3L or the 4L. automatic. I keep track of my mileage on all of my vehicles, on the 3L I got an average of 22 mpg (Imp.), the 4L is the same.
I don't have a lead foot, 90% of my driving is highway at anywhere from 100 to 120 kph.
Incidentally, that's the same mileage I used to get with my S-10 which was a 4.3, had a lot more get up and go but I didn't like it anywhere as much as either Ranger.

The ranger powertrain is all Ford except for the Mazda transmission

Click to expand...

You sure, I could have sworn the engine was Mazda.........Mike

My dad had some for rangers for service trucks a long time ago. They were good for that and had good gas mileage also. Chevrolet is getting back into the Police Fleet market with the "RWD Caprice PPV". It comes in two versions, one with a Vortec V6 and a Vortec V8. The only problem is that they are being produced in Australia and shipped here. Ford had suspened production of their Ford Crown VIc Patrol vehicle. They have gone to a FWD on the Fusion base I believe. My problem with this is that we are importing cars that could be built here by a company we helped bail out. SO Sorry for hijacking this thread just had to say it.

The Rangers that I have seen overseas (Haiti and Jamaica) are diesels, and look to be Mazda built. Like other diesels, I doubt that they will pass US emission laws.
The Ranger is a great truck, with a long run. Everything comes to an end, for something supposedly better.
I've had three, and my dad has had three.

we wont run out of Rangers for a LONG time...... though not new ones but "new to you";
I just bought a Dakota but not new; I got a 94; theres still a bunch of 87-96 Dakotas on the road enough to keep me supplied for a while if I too don't decide to return to full size after I wear this one out.I prefer that era to newer ones.
Likewise there's TONS AND TONS of Rangers yet to be used up by subsequent owners; and still a better truck than Nissan or Toyota ever had.

What I can't figure out is why the compact pickups have been growing so large. The Ranger really was the closest thing remaining to a compact truck. Toyota Tacomas are huge now, and new Dakotas are every bit as big as full-size trucks were not that many years ago. I suspect that the next manufacturer to offer a very small pickup with a significant gas mileage advantage over a full-size will have a big seller. If they offer a little diesel, I may just have to buy one myself.

I figured the current run of compact trucks would run its course, but I would have bet that the Ranger would have been the last to go.

dodge trucker said:

we wont run out of Rangers for a LONG time...... though not new ones but "new to you";
I just bought a Dakota but not new; I got a 94; theres still a bunch of 87-96 Dakotas on the road enough to keep me supplied for a while if I too don't decide to return to full size after I wear this one out.I prefer that era to newer ones.
Likewise there's TONS AND TONS of Rangers yet to be used up by subsequent owners; and still a better truck than Nissan or Toyota ever had.

Click to expand...

I have to disagree with the better than Nissan or Toyota deal. Maybe who owned them, but I never saw a Ranger (or a Dakota for that matter) outlast any 22r toyota I had, and I got 230,000 out of my Nissan...

And like was posted earlier, the gas mileage (or lack thereof) and the almost identical sticker price to the larger truck spelled the demise of the Ranger.

And as also posted earlier, a small 4 door truck with a diesel would be a good seller if they could get it to pass emissions...

Ive seen more then a few Rangers hit the 300k mark [and the MazdaB truck clones..]

It is sad to see them go, and like Dodgeboy said... its sad to see the market dry up... It would be nice to see a small, full frame pickup, with a real bed, that you can get cheap, and use. A nice 4cyl oil burner would be a nice touch, but doupt we will see it.