Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
See Official Rules for eligibility and other requirements.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
There are a million variables associated with making a used car purchase decision. You've given two-age and mileage.
To offer a more informed opinion, knowing such things as price, maintenence/maintenence records, type of driving done by the owner, was it a northern or Arizona car, 4 cylinder vs. 6, etc. would help. For instance, given the mileage and age alone without knowing anything else, I would say not to buy it. However, if the truck was driven primarily cross country through the southwest, meticulously maintained, and going for $500, I might still question it because of the low price makes it look like the owner is trying to get rid of it fast.
Thus, not only do you have to consider many variables, but also how much weight to give each variable-high mileage might not necessarily be bad versus a truck with 30k miles that was driven only in stop and go traffic and only for 5 miles at a time even though both trucks are the same age.
but with 170k miles. My 99 ranger was actually a really good truck my dad bought
it new and handed it down to me the same clutch and same tranny lasted 170k
miles. However now either my clutch or tranny has blown and its being looked at.
I want to get all the price checks i can on a new tranny for a 99 for ranger so
i dont get ripped off.
If you really like it for the price and never plan to use 4wd, then buy it and don't put any money into fixing the hub problem.
Good luck!
I've never owned a truck before and the feeling of height and power was invigorating.
I really enjoy doing research on the internet and I decided to look up the reviews of the Ranger and bask in the glory of my new truck.
As you can imagine it was quite a shock when I read Edmunds review of the Ranger.
The quote that applied directly to me was:
"If you're not a hard-core off-roader, though, there's little reason to consider the 2007 Ford Ranger. Trucks like the Dodge Dakota, Nissan Frontier and Toyota Tacoma are easier and more comfortable to drive on pavement, and all offer roomier cabs with more conveniences and safety features."
What???
So I did some research on my Ranger and comparable trucks.
My Ranger (XLT Extended Supercab 4x2)
Engine : 3.0 L 12 Valve V6
Horsepower : 148 hp @ 4900 rpm
Torque : 180 lb-ft @ 3980 rpm
Fuel Economy: 17 city / 23 hwy
Nissan Frontier (King SE-V6 4x2)
Engine: 4L 24 Valve V6
Horsepower : 261 hp @ 5600 rpm
Torque : 281 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm
Fuel Economy : 16 city / 20 hwy
Toyota Tacoma (Access Cab 4x2)
Engine: 2.7L 16 Valve V4
Horsepower : 159 @ 5200 rpm
Torque : 180 lb –ft @ 3800 rpm
Fuel Economy : 21 city / 27 hwy
Dodge Dakota (ST Club Cab 4x2)
Engine: 3.7L 12 Valve V6
Horsepower : 210 @ 5200 rpm
Torque : 235 lb –ft @ 4000 rpm
Fuel Economy : 16 city / 22 hwy
Chevy Colorado (LS Ext Cab 2WD)
Engine: 2.8 L 16 Valve V4
Horsepower : 175 hp @ 5600 rpm
Torque : 185 lb – ft @ 2800 rpm
Fuel Economy : 17 city / 24 hwy
Going by these specs taken off the company websites, the Ranger is severely underpowered.
Exactly what Edmunds said:
"When equipped with the 4.0-liter V6, the Ford Ranger offers solid acceleration, but it feels underpowered with either the 3.0-liter V6 or the base four-cylinder."
I have never driven any other trucks, but I can state from my own experience that the truck feels kind of slow. It's only a feeling, but I had it even when I test drived. I thought it was all trucks. Going by the review and specs it obviously isn't.
And then there is the price :
(www.xe.com for Canadian to US funds)
Ford Ranger: $22,899 ($20,069 US)
Nissan Frontier: $26,598 ($23,314 US)
Toyota Tacoma: $22,535 ($19,749 US)
Dodge Dakota: $24,925 ($21,843 US)
Chevy Colorado: $21,440 ($18,790 US)
and my research leaves me feeling really, quite, unhappy.
The Ranger is weaker than the competition, even weaker than the Tacoma and Colorado which are using 4 cylinder engines.
The Ranger's fuel economy is almost identical to Dodge and Chevy and comparable to Nissan (which is far more powerful) and much worse than the Tacoma (which is still more powerful).
The Ranger has the comparable cargo space to the other trucks too with the Chevy, Dodge and Nissan being even a bit bigger.
Finally, there's price.
The Ranger is more expensive than the Chevy (which is still stronger), more expensive than the Tacoma (only a bit stronger, but much more fuel efficient and it's a V4!), a little cheaper than Dodge (but far less powerful and barely more fuel efficient), and a good bit cheaper than Nissan (but much, much less powerful and still only a bit more fuel efficient).
It feels good to get this off my chest, but I have to say:
"I think I've been pwned."
The truck was originally used as a delivery vehicle in a networking business, then privately owned, and since the vehicle was maintenanced at the same garage, I've got a complete maintenance history, including the transmission replacement in late 2004. It's got a bed liner and a tonneau cover too, both in mint condition.
The truck was smoked in, so I got rid of the odor... now to just find seat covers that actually fit a 60-40 split bench seat snugly.
The 2.3l engine runs good, with some minor vibration and slight rocking at a stop, so I'll look into that.
Overall I love having a truck again! (Former owner of a 1997 Mazda B4000 4x4)
Used, however, Ford is the clear choice due to uber depreciation and dependibility of the old technology.
If it'll make ya feel any better... Toyota is having lots of quality/reliability issues the past 2 years, and I've heard horror stories about the seating position/fit and finish in the Colorados.
So, you basically traded engine power for dependability and cheaper repair costs due to older design/technology. There, did I find the silver lining within a pile of dog poop? lol!
Also, I posted a question on the performance vs mileage of the 2.3L and 3.0L on the "engine" forum - if you have any ideas, please let me know!
For a great research tool while looking at Ford Truck, hit http://www.fordvehicles.com/trucks/ranger/
and click on "search dealer inventory" to see what the local dealer has. You can even see the window sticker with MSRP (from Ford) and options for that truck. Hope this helps.
BTW, on the 2.3L vs. 3.0L question; I've had both and the economy on the 2.3L is great (23-25mpg typical). The 3.0L isn't worth the waste in gas for performance. It lacks any real power, :lemon: (acts much like the 4 banger) and only averaged 18mpg for either city or hwy. I have the 4.0L now and see the same mileage with way better performance for 17mpg so far. :shades:
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Asked the dealer to eat the 495.00 doc fees. Said he couldn't budge on that. I said I'm not going to pay that kind of money for someone to walk to the printer. So we parted our ways and I pondered a white one close to home. Half hour later phone rings. Guess who? "We will deduct the price of the vehicle by 495.00." Total price not including taxes 10,990.00 The vehicle should arrive tomorrow. I hate the games you have to play with these dealers, but at 59,I"m starting to get good at it.
These are canadian prices.... or should I say Pesos?......
That's cheap....
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Truck still had about a quarter tank before he filled it. Can't complain about that mileage. The list price was $16,014 plus the $495.00 doc fees . So at $10990.00 I quess that was a pretty good deal. The cd/mp3/sattelite radio is well worth the extra money. $325.00 here in canada. Just wish it had heated mirrors.....oh well.....