Alex you have excellent content covered in a relatively short video. Most of your competition on TH-cam has much less to talk about, but have a lot of editorializing. You provide all the essential facts to make a purchase decision in your comparisons. Amazing content!!
This is the best Ranger review I’ve watched on TH-cam, and honestly answered a big concern I had with my Ranger. Sometimes it feels like it lurches into 3rd when I’m gently accelerating and now I know that is the transmission actively skipping 3rd and going to 4th. Great content!
Same with mine. It does not do it all the time. I figured it out when I pressed the + button on the shift to display the gear numbers and saw it happen.
I just bought a Lariat FX4. My son has a 2017 Tacoma that I picked up for him the beginning of 2018. I went with the Ranger as it had more interior space and comfort. I also really like the 10 speed transmission. It is way smoother than the Tacoma and does not hunt for gears. The engine is also much more responsive due to the higher torque. The ride is smoother and the interior is quieter. The electronics package is also way better.
@@haydendilbeck8151 Sir 4 cylinders in cars are not the problem yes cars can easly reach well over 200 thousand miles, trucks on the average with a 4 banger do not being trucks have much more weight then a car does & people haul things with trucks such as trailers & bed loads of whatever which puts strain on the engine ultimately breaking down the 4 banger much faster then a 6 banger that is fact.
“If you get the longer bed, you get the shorter cab. If you get the shorter cab, you get the longer bed.” Sorry, Alex. Couldn’t leave it alone. Great review as always!
Brake controller is available via dealer install, sometime early this year. Integrated, RedArc, basically the same as the F-150. Also the wires are there on every one that came with the factory tow package to hook whatever brake controller you like up with ease.
I've owned two Rangers. Loved them. Now own a Frontier. Also solid and reliable. Will be looking for next truck in couple of yrs. Thanks for the tour....
I have a 2018 Ridgeline for over a year now and had no problems . Having a trunk is great - use it more than I thought I would . It is all the truck I need. I agree with Alex’s comments
No it does not have a locking tail gate . Trunk locks though. There is after market lock for tailgate . My biggest complaint is rear doors don’t open enough -
Derek Shoe search door checkers for the ridgeline that would be the solution. Would still keep my ridgeline over this. ... Unless they bring the diesel ranger raptor from Asia.
One thing to point out, while the Colorado is older in America, the Ranger is older overall. The current Ranger was released in 2011 with a heavy refresh in 2015. The Colorado we know was made in 2012. So depending on whether you count the refresh, both trucks are rather old compared to their half ton counterparts, so the taco isnt even that far out of place.
At least Ford changed the engine and suspension for N America. Plus they added all the electronics. The global Ranger is not able to tow 7700lbs even with the diesel
Nice review, fair! I have just road tested a ranger lariat fx4. Loved it. As configured it was 40k. Not bad. Looked at Toyota trd, off road as comparison. Like the ranger better.
John Eason I recently did the same. The Tacoma was awful. Terrible tranny and engine. Very uncomfortable seating. I don’t understand how people buy those things. The Ranger was pretty nice, comfortable, nice engine and tranny. Easy to drive. It’s on my list of finalists. The Toyota isn’t.
The best comparison I have seen = well done indeed. I started looking at Rangers before they were out - back in early November. I drove one in a pre-release test in North Houston, and liked it. When I first went to the dealership, I drove a full sized F150, which was set up for towing - and all I tow is a lightweight trailer with a motorcycle - and that is rare. I continued looking, and comparing Rangers, F150's, Rams, etc until finally deciding on a F150. I am a bit over 6'2", and found that the F150 was much more comfortable. They both drove OK - but the milage difference is neglible and the comfort much greater for me in the F150. If your 6' the rear seat is not usable - and truly I don't think it will be for anything other than a very short trip. Drive different trucks and make your own decision. (This truck replaced a Toyota Tundra. I liked it quite a bit when I bought it, but the local Toyota dealership was charing 400 more for 'Nitrogen Filled Tires', which is a scam to make the dealer more money. But I'll let someone else pay that. Besides, i think the F150 is a better vehicle, anyway.
I recently bought a 2020 Ranger Lariat FX4 super crew. I traded in a 2018 Colorado LT crew cab 4x4. I would definitely recommend the Ranger over the Colorado. The Ranger if definitely quicker and feels like it handles better. The only downside is the price. But all these midsize trucks are more expensive then they should be.
Besides the lights, power seat, apple and android, they also added 360 camera and an all terrain camera that lets you see under and around the truck for obstacles. Toyota has a history of making small improvements to their vehicles so the upcoming refresh was as expected.
"You load sixteen tons, and what do you get? Another day older and deeper in debt." If you're in your 60s, you'd remember at least some of the lyrics... Great review and video.
Own a '17 Ridgeline and Alex's comments are spot on. If you can live with its reduced bed and towing capacity, and your ego comes to terms with its SUV base, Ridgeline is a superior Sport Utility Truck.
that looks like a mini van with a bed.... sorry... comfort or not, the newest ridgelines are sad looking. the older ones are not bad. but they really dropped the ball on the new design, they may as well as put a cap in it and call it a minivan
We're a couple days away from ordering a new Ranger. We own an '02 Tacoma and we've test driven the Colorado. This video is great, thanks for making it. Very informative.
The rest of the world doesn’t even like the raptor edition of the ranger. Has a diesel with like 200hp and a little under 400 lb ft torque. F150 raptor lovers would not go for that over here lol
Again with the halogen headlights! Good, safe lighting is a safety issue and should not be a cost cutting measure. What is it with various manufacturers giving consumers less safe lighting? Auto makers need to stop cheaping out and provide HID or LED headlights on all cars and trucks as standard, not an option!
LED's are only dangerous because of the wide use of reflectors. LED projectors that are appropriately aimed at the road are no different than halogens.
There are laws on headlight brightness that affect manufacturers. Brighter lights are just what assholes install because they dont care about blinding other drivers, because the are assholes.
Agreed. My wife's new Rav4 lighting sucks. It's hard to see at night. A lot of rav4 owners are complaining about it also unless they have the limited or SE which comes with LED or HID. I tried putting in LED bulbs but it made it worse. The beam will shine right into the oncoming traffic drivers vision blinding them so I took them off and put the stock ones back on. I hear it's the cheap projector that toyota uses on the car. For a car compa6that promotes safety I'd expect them to put better headlights on.
I agree. Being able to see is the most important safety factor, I dont need any gadgets. I just wan to see. Make LEDs standard. Plus halogen look horrible.
There are a lot of missed opportunities with this "new" Ranger but sadly the lack of competition and silly Toyota/GM pricing opened the door wide open for Ford.
N Pooch again, what do you feel they should have done “better”? And done give me some BS about 2.7 V6 this or Raptor that. I mean really about stacking this up against the competition.
I wish they would bring back the little trucks. They were more fun to drive and better on gas. I just need to occasionally haul stuff (not trailer stuff).
3.3 v6 from f150? have you driven a ford lately? ;) yeah i went there. the f150 has a 2.7 lt twin turbo, 3.5 lt twin turbo and the 5.0 v8. Ive always been a "trucks need a v8" guy... until I drove my 2.7 lt turbo... youd never know it wasnt a v8. Ive driven (and ordered) the new ranger. Its pulls much better then any of the v6s in its class and i think better then the 2.7 ford f150. the 3.5 does have a bit better pull, but you're also paying about 20k more to get that...
@@kmeekins4168 just a thought, turbos are not that hard to change, Im not saying its easy either but there are much harder things to change in a vehicle (i have changed a few in my day but not on ecoboost engines) people are going on like you have to completely disassemble the engine I have the 2.0l in my escape and Im glad I have it.
Alex, thanks for your criticism of the Tacoma at 7:53. I agree 100% and that makes the Tacoma and related 4Runner unacceptably uncomfortable for me. I know those are popular trucks, but I hate that aspect of Toyota truck design.
@Matthew James Maybe so as the Taco usually has about 5 inch ground clearance advantage on its competitors. But that doesn't make it any more comfortable. It's useless ground clearance to me since I can't drive it more than 2 minutes without killing my tailbone and back.
I like it but don't trust the motor as a pure GDI, even Ford added port injection to the 2.7 and 3.5 EB. I wish the ranger used F150s 3.3 gdi & pfi v6. I'll wait and see but I have been watching new ranger forums for issues.
I honestly think the 2007-2010 Sport Trac looks better. AND, that model had a V8 option. And I'm wondering how good of mpgs one will see in a gen 2 Sport Trac, if the Ranger Ecoboost engine and the 10 speed were swapped in.
I think the ranger will be a great truck, but I think itll come down to resale value which has to be determined where as the Tacoma retains its value extremely well
Well, Ford refused to give customers an optional engine and a choice of a manual transmission . It’s like Ford said screw you, you’re going to take it or leave it. I’ll leave it.
This is a criminally under rated channel! i love the info, its quick and to the point with everything you want to know. However just in my own opinion when comparing trucks i think its unfair to compare unibody frames to body on frame designs. Also if i could ask for 1 more thing: @12:51 when you start driving the vehicle could we have a camera view from inside the truck, like a dashcam?
At the 2:00 minute mark, you said that there's no reason for compact trucks these days. Well, Ford is coming out with a new unibody Courier pickup really soon.
Thanks for the vid. The rear seat is totally worthless for not folding flat for anyone who wants to store some tool bags or groceries out of the weather.
I don't want a full size truck because it is just too large for my needs and my garage. That said, I am hoping and waiting for Ford to put the 2.7L Ecoboost into the Ranger. Then it will land in my garage for sure.
Alex. Amazing review as usual. Great review. No one in the biz is a mellifluous as you are during a review. I don't think you missed a beat. I would have liked to have known how the top spec Lariat 4 wheel drive drove around town? Did you have a chance to test that one and was it as "jumpy", when unloaded, on city and country roads, as this RWD spec?
@Alex on Autos Chevy Colorado Z71 has an automatic locking limited slip rear differential which makes it capable of sending more than 60% of the power to either rear wheel. I know what I’d rather have on an icy surface or a loose dirt road
The locker in Ranger and Colorado locks...which means no more than 50% to each rear wheel. No torque-vectoring here. That said, you will ALWAYS get 50% to each wheel when locked.
I dont think the Ranger will dethrone the Taco but I bet it will steal some sales away from it. For years the taco was left unchallenged. The Frontier was not even on the radar for most midsize truck shoppers. However, if I was in the market for a midsize truck, it'll probably be a ZR2 Colorado or a FX4 Ranger. I've a feeling the Gladiator Rubicon will be too expensive. I test drove a Taco but didnt like it as much.
To everyone talking about reliability etc: We get this (and a SUV body style) in Asia (and SA) with a BRILLIANT I5 diesel. Won't get into the EcoBoost debate, but Rangers and Everests (the upcoming Bronco for you Yanks) here have proven to be just as reliable and more niggle-free than Toyota's popular (and hugely overpriced in some markets) versions of the Tacoma and 4Runner. And the running conditions here in some areas are really bad. Ford Australia did a great job engineering this for high temperatures and rough roads. The ride quality on the SUV body style (no leaf springs at the rear) on broken roads has to be experienced to be believed. In terms of dynamics and refinement, this is on a different level from Toyota. That said, the Isuzu version of the GM Colorado over here, though woefully underpowered, is as reliable as anything else.
Unfortunately, diesel is so much more expensive here in the U.S. than petrol so there just isn't a diesel option for most mini/midsize pickups and SUVs
I'm thinking about selling my '15 Tundra double cab and getting a Ranger. I'm just a dude with a dog. I don't tow anything. I like to go camping, backpacking, fishing, dirt roads, etc. The Tundra is so gigantic and I don't need that much truck at all.
6 ปีที่แล้ว +1
In Thailand, we get the 2 L Bi-Turbo Diesel engine.
It was the transit connect if one needed a compact commercial vehicle. Otherwise great Ford thinking told the public if you want a truck the f150 is fine.......after 22 years of being a Ford customer I left and own Chevy Colorado which I am very pleased. Not perfect but at least a great mid size.
That instrument cluster screen was used in the 2012-2014 Focus and 2013-2016 Escape but after those years they refreshed the graphics. Confused as to why those updated graphics aren’t in the Ranger?
john cooper I know that but refreshed Escape in 2017 and refreshed Focus in 2015 had been freshened and you’d think it would be simple to produce them with those refreshed graphics.
Well said Caleb. This Ranger has been available overseas for years. The Gladiator is going to have alot of reliability issues. I would buy the new Ford Ranger.
Oh, I bet it’ll be a dumpster fire. I’d pick a Ridgeline for my money 😅, but definitely this would be more reliable than the Jeep. If this had a torque vectoring rear, then it’d be in a new league.
The main difference for America seems to be the gas engine. Most sales worldwide are of diesel versions. There is soon to be the new option of the EcoBlue diesel 2.0 engines with the ten speed transmission elsewhere, but otherwise not much change apart from the option of a coil sprung rear axle for more performance/lifestyle versions. All versions sold in the UK have a 2300lb payload. There is a special order economy rear axle that is higher geared and which limits the towing capacity to around 6000lbs, down from the standard 7700lbs. In less than two years time, VW will end the current Amorak production and market a badge engineered Ranger instead.
I like it...I really do like it but I have to say I don't like that an EcoBoost engine is the only engine choice. I'm still a little skeptical with turbo engines even though Ford has probably proven themselves with them. I mean, they put it in their best seller when people were questioning what they were doing. I wish the Ranger had like an NA 3.3L V6 as an option. I don't like how buzzy 4 cylinders can be. I have to say that I prefer to have a full-size F-150 SuperCrew with the 5.0L V8. It's always been a dream truck of mine especially since they have the 5.0 as an engine choice.
When I looked at Colorado it costs more than the Silverado. Same with the ranger since it doesn't get 14k off MSRP like f150. Gas mileage is the same. There's no point to these unless you just can't handle a real truck.
Not sure about where you live, but Colorados are regularly available for mid-$20K in crew cab/V6 with cloth seats, power opts. Only Silverado you can get for that is reg-cab V6 vinyl seat and crank windows.
Smaller trucks need to distance themselves MORE from full size. They need to be much smaller, much cheaper, much more efficient, and if that means much less capable, then fine. There are more than enough people who just need to haul bikes, lawn stuff, small appliances, camping gear, etc., which never weighs more than 750 lb. Cutting the capacity means everything can get smaller/lighter. It won't need such a high ride height. All that improves efficiency and lowers cost.
Many of the Mid-Sized pickup buyers can handle a “real truck” (by this I’m sure you mean a full-size) just fine. It often has to do with Off-Roading on tight trails where a “real truck” won’t fit, maneuverability and parking and just not needing the extra size, payload weight or towing capacity. Insurance and registration is generally cheaper as well.
thanks for this info. I' was feeling overwhelmed with the pricing options of the higher end f150 & f250 and thought maybe the Ranger would be a good option. Price wise its great, but practicality wise for what I need a truck for, it won't work for me. Thank you for helping me make this informed decision
Not sure about discounts in the US, but in many cases up here in Canada it can be cheaper to get into a nicely equipped full size than it is to get into a midsize mid range truck as discounts on full size trucks are usually double that if midsize.
Yea here in Idaho a dealer has a Ranger XLT 4x4 for $40,040 and a F-150 XLT 4x4 with a 5.0L V6 priced at $38,000...so it boils down to what you need it for and if it fits well in your driveway/garage
Anecdotally, I have read hundreds, if not thousands, of comments about problems with ecoboost engines. I’ve been fortunate enough to only break down in one vehicle in my life, which was a Saturn SL1 at 90k miles. I’ve driven my Honda’s and Toyota’s up to 200k miles without issue. I want to make the jump, but I don’t want to be either: broken down, or staring at a costly engine rebuild bill 90k into the life of the truck. This is why I don’t see lower torque or fuel economy as a disadvantage. If I have to spend $5k to fix an engine at 90k miles, there’s the extra fuel cost, and if I choose the newer tech, it comes with the experience of being broken down on the side of the road.
There were some early ecoboast issues that have since been corrected. This problem from what i have seen was corrected by the "catch can" mod which is no longer required. Ford fixed it. I have a 3.5 ecoboost i a 2016 explorer. That engine is so much fun. I had a 2016 5.0 F150. It was fun too, but that 3.5 ecoboost will leave you quite satisfied after overtaking a jerk on the highway. Longevity being your concern, i can only speak to 40000miles. No issues as of yet.
Joe Pah You’re right. I don’t have a lot of hard evidence against this engine. I hear a lot about turbos in general though, and I see how Toyota avoids turbos at all cost. I considered the 5.0 coyote F-150, but I didn’t want/need a 1/2 ton.
benjaminwayneb You linked the HD trucks, which Toyota doesn’t make. I see this report all the time. You didn’t read it. It exactly describes my comment. Toyota ranks highest in mechanical (engine/drive train/transmission) and lowest in “features.” So when my “features” stop working I can drive to the shop to have them fixed, but when their “mechanical” stops working they’ll be calling a tow truck. The results are literally exactly my comment, “I will trade the extra tech for not being broken down on the side of the road.”
Wait stop the press I just watched your review of the Colorado ( I was hoping I could get your insight into how the ride on the ZR2 was in comparison to the Ranger ) and in that you said that you had tested a Colorado with the V6 and it got a 0-60 in 6 sec flat beating the Honda Ridgeline. SO which is it is the Colorado faster or the Ranger. I would guess the Ranger but.....And I just moved to the burbs ( unfortunately) and I would love a full size truck but they don't fit in the little garage I got stuck with. Plus these little trucks are a lot better for getting around in the city. I don't want the fake Ridgeline as I still go out to my parents farm and need something that can still haul and tow stuff. I love all the new tech on the Ranger but with the DSSV shocks that the Colorado ZR 2 has I would think it would give a better ride than the Ranger over more different types of terrain. I Don't suppose you could go drive the ZR 2 V6 and remind yourself of that vehicle because it seems like you've forgotten how much you liked it.
You would be surprised how much that 'fake' ridgeline can handle. I get if you don't like the looks of it, but it's capability is not fake. Tell that to the 22 sheets of 3/4's ply and 10 8x10's I hauled in one trip this past summer.
Most reviews coming out now show the Colorado (not in ZR2 trim) is faster by 0.4 sec 0-60. This is what Alex inadvertently found when you take the number from his old video. th-cam.com/video/bDb_oUjI_Uk/w-d-xo.html
I drove one in the city traffic and never got to try sport mode but thought the motor felt anemic in regular mode. Like most modern trucks, it jumped into a higher gear way too soon.
He needs to throw the Ridgeline into the mix. Better mileage and power. Towing is down a bit but the payload is on par and it's just a nicer truck for the money.
You’re opinion. He did plenty of Ridgeline comparisons. It’s a nice SUV, not a truck but most can’t get past the price and the look. Nice try though. . . Move along in your Soccer Mom Pretend Truck
@@deanemberley2333 It's by definition a truck. Look it up in the dictionary. Nowhere does it say it has to have a ladder body on frame and ride like crap. Ridgeline has a 1580 lb payload capacity which is comparable to the Taco and the Chevy twins. 5000 towing capacity which is 1500 lbs more than the SUV Pilot. I came from a 2011 Tundra and wanted a smaller truck. Compared all of them and chose the RL as it is the best value, was 5 less than the loaded up Ranger and Canyon and will be running far longer with less hassle than those. I wanted to love the Ranger but it is cheap inside and cramped. All Ford did was bring over an old truck from other parts of the world and slapped some new bits on it. Fail.
Justin Fontaine it’s not a fail. It’s been proven for years overseas. I first saw it while working in the Philippines and South Africa. Foreign Work colleagues recommended them. Also, no way you can get a RL where I live for cheaper. You also have no proof it will last longer or be problematic. Good for you though. Anyway you are just making blanket statements with nothing but anecdotal evidence.
No one ever mentions the fuel type required in these reviews. You use 87 octane in this truck even though it has a turbo. Thats very good on the wallet as well. Its also funny you say RWD I ONLY see a 4X4 option and it is listed as standard on all Rangers. Where did you find a 2WD Ranger?
i like the proportions on this truck much more than the colorado/canyon, this one has normal pickup proportions and shapes, the colorado has a weirdly huge bed and a really low cab that slants downward towards the front, it looks strange.
Should stop comparing the Honda to any truck. It is not a truck. It's a car with an open trunk. And stop talking HP. Torque is what get the work done and is the main factor for any truck. HP is theoretical. Torque is actual capability
Alex is the most thorough and efficient reviewer around. I have a different perspective on his comments about leasing around 20:20, as he stated that resale value is not related to lease price. In fact, lease pricing is based on the resale value (aka residual value) at the end of the lease, typically 3 years in duration. So for two vehicles with the same initial price, the one with better resale value will have a lower monthly lease cost. Similarly, one can lease a more expensive car with great resale value for the same amount or less than a vehicle with lower price but lower resale value. This later example was real for me when I was comparing Acura TSX vs. Mazda 6 back in 2009. I agree with Alex that if you keep a car for 10 years, then just get what you like best.
So why would I want ANY mid size pick up when milage is about the same as a full size? What? You want to save garage space? My F150 eco boost is averaging 20 mpg, and i have more room for gear and more comfort
You might not, but buyers of mid-sizes do it for Off-Roading prowess, maneuverability and ease of parking and those types of reasons. Also I think this Ranger is showing a few more MPG combined avg. than 20.
i heard what he said he got in the review, which if true is impressive.But EPA are making the auto makers put accurate mileage ratings which is nothing close to what he said. If they did get 30 on the highway, then im onboard. i guess if you live in urban areas where parking is tight? @@brodiwheeler7583
pahuntnut 30 would be hard to believe, did he say close to 30? Like 26/27 maybe 28? It’s impressive MPG even at 23 Combined. Impressive Torque and HP and 10-spd tranny... I’m just not down with the turbo motor. There’s several trails here in Colorado where a full-size truck is just to big to make it up... and many more where it might make it, but it’s coming home with some new pinstripes for sure! That’s the Off-Road advantage of a mid-size truck.
In my place the EVEREST/ENDEAVOUR also has a diesel engine 3.2 5cyl and 2 ltr bi turbo with more than 550 nm torque available from 1500 revvs ... Y theres no diesel in america
Saw Ranger this past weekend. Disappointed. Interior cramped compared to Colorado (especially front head room), cupholders and window switches too far back, gas tank too small, no NA V-6 option, no crew longbed option...simply didn't feel anywhere as comfortable as the Colorado.
The new ford ranger 4×4 with a 4cylinder? I owened a 1984 ranger 4×4 with 6cylinder it was a stupid decision who thought of only releasing a 4cylinder 4×4 truck not giving the option of a 6cylinder totall dummy could only think of releasing just a 4cylinder...
I suspect more optional configuations will come, but at launch, they are keeping it simple. Early indications are that they will not be able to build enough to meet demand.
alliejr I admire your optimism. I feel there will be no additional cab configurations or drivetrain options. They may add another engine to the lineup but manual trans and regular cab are very much dead here.
I like the Ranger. I am still scared of a turbo charged direct injected engine. I don't want a turbo from anybody. You got 32mpg highway? That is quite a bit higher than the EPA estimates. That is quite impressive. I have known some guys with the Toyota trucks and those trucks run forever. One guy I know had well over 200,000 miles and never turned a wrench on the engine.
Until Ford does a full redesign for the Ranger, Tacoma will outsell it. We will see at the end of March what q1 looks like since ford doesn’t report sales monthly anymore.
I had to listen to that twice. I don't understand that comment either. I like Alex, but the editing was odd, his measurements were off, the Fiesta comment, and it actually can have a brake controller installed by Ford. 🤷🏼♂️
Make that rear seat a foldable 60/40 split already! I can’t tell you how many times I fold down my rear seat to avoid the rain when buying items. Why would you want to put something heavy on your nice fancy leather seats? Fix that and I’m in
True the high trim ranger gets expensive. The full sized f150 is a real truck. The Ranger is a great truck,but won’t take the punishment and abuse of a full size pu.
I'm torn. I want a GMC Canyon Denali but there are also things I like about the new Ranger...but I don't like the looks of the Ranger as much as the Canyon Denali. And I'd rather have a strong non-turbo V6 too. Hmmm (currently own a 2014 F150 with the 3.5 twin turbo).
im sort of in the same boat, i wanted to get a ranger and was waiting for it to come out, but now i think its kinda underwhelming. I'm now leaning towards the Ridgeline just for practicality and comfort. I too have a 2014 F150, but i have the 5.0. its a super crew long bed fx4...i only average 13ish though, with 15 highway...so i wanted a mid side for better mpg. What do you get with the 3.5?
@@lonespartan31289 Back and forth to work during summer (warm weather time of year), I average around 16.7 MPG (all stock and I'm not too easy on the pedal). Trip is about 35 miles and about 60% of that is highway and 40% backroads with about 9 stops (lights/signs). If I'm on the highway on a pretty flat stretch I can easily get near 20 MPG. Winter months the MPG for me drops to around 15.5 MPG back and forth to work. It's a 4x4 super cab with 6.5' bed.
@@ThePhotographyHobbyist that's not bad. I know the newer trucks with the 10 speed get pretty good mpg and so i was hoping the ranger would be better. The canyon/ colorado aren't to bad mpg wise either but i hate the interior of the Colorado. The Denali is nice but pricey.
Alex you have excellent content covered in a relatively short video. Most of your competition on TH-cam has much less to talk about, but have a lot of editorializing. You provide all the essential facts to make a purchase decision in your comparisons. Amazing content!!
I've been waiting for this review by you. Thanks for being the only reviewer that gives an honest, unbiased review.
This is the best Ranger review I’ve watched on TH-cam, and honestly answered a big concern I had with my Ranger. Sometimes it feels like it lurches into 3rd when I’m gently accelerating and now I know that is the transmission actively skipping 3rd and going to 4th. Great content!
Same with mine. It does not do it all the time. I figured it out when I pressed the + button on the shift to display the gear numbers and saw it happen.
I just bought a Lariat FX4. My son has a 2017 Tacoma that I picked up for him the beginning of 2018. I went with the Ranger as it had more interior space and comfort. I also really like the 10 speed transmission. It is way smoother than the Tacoma and does not hunt for gears. The engine is also much more responsive due to the higher torque. The ride is smoother and the interior is quieter. The electronics package is also way better.
I agree 100%
But a ranger with 4 banger? You will be replacing the engine before 200 thousand miles.
@@BurtBowers most modern engines will last over 200k if you take care of them.
@@haydendilbeck8151 Sir 4 cylinders in cars are not the problem yes cars can easly reach well over 200 thousand miles, trucks on the average with a 4 banger do not being trucks have much more weight then a car does & people haul things with trucks such as trailers & bed loads of whatever which puts strain on the engine ultimately breaking down the 4 banger much faster then a 6 banger that is fact.
Did you get it for under sticker? Did you get the B&O sound system, and all the trimmings?
“If you get the longer bed, you get the shorter cab. If you get the shorter cab, you get the longer bed.”
Sorry, Alex. Couldn’t leave it alone. Great review as always!
Nice pick up on that!
Brake controller is available via dealer install, sometime early this year. Integrated, RedArc, basically the same as the F-150. Also the wires are there on every one that came with the factory tow package to hook whatever brake controller you like up with ease.
I've owned two Rangers. Loved them. Now own a Frontier. Also solid and reliable. Will be looking for next truck in couple of yrs. Thanks for the tour....
I have a 2018 Ridgeline for over a year now and had no problems . Having a trunk is great - use it more than I thought I would . It is all the truck I need. I agree with Alex’s comments
Derek Shoe
Does the tailgate lock?
No it does not have a locking tail gate . Trunk locks though. There is after market lock for tailgate . My biggest complaint is rear doors don’t open enough -
Derek Shoe search door checkers for the ridgeline that would be the solution. Would still keep my ridgeline over this. ... Unless they bring the diesel ranger raptor from Asia.
@@derekshoe7236 Rear door hack th-cam.com/video/_9-7ckh819o/w-d-xo.html
One thing to point out, while the Colorado is older in America, the Ranger is older overall. The current Ranger was released in 2011 with a heavy refresh in 2015. The Colorado we know was made in 2012. So depending on whether you count the refresh, both trucks are rather old compared to their half ton counterparts, so the taco isnt even that far out of place.
At least Ford changed the engine and suspension for N America. Plus they added all the electronics. The global Ranger is not able to tow 7700lbs even with the diesel
Nice review, fair!
I have just road tested a ranger lariat fx4. Loved it. As configured it was 40k. Not bad. Looked at Toyota trd, off road as comparison. Like the ranger better.
John Eason I recently did the same. The Tacoma was awful. Terrible tranny and engine. Very uncomfortable seating. I don’t understand how people buy those things. The Ranger was pretty nice, comfortable, nice engine and tranny. Easy to drive. It’s on my list of finalists. The Toyota isn’t.
The best comparison I have seen = well done indeed. I started looking at Rangers before they were out - back in early November. I drove one in a pre-release test in North Houston, and liked it. When I first went to the dealership, I drove a full sized F150, which was set up for towing - and all I tow is a lightweight trailer with a motorcycle - and that is rare. I continued looking, and comparing Rangers, F150's, Rams, etc until finally deciding on a F150. I am a bit over 6'2", and found that the F150 was much more comfortable. They both drove OK - but the milage difference is neglible and the comfort much greater for me in the F150. If your 6' the rear seat is not usable - and truly I don't think it will be for anything other than a very short trip. Drive different trucks and make your own decision. (This truck replaced a Toyota Tundra. I liked it quite a bit when I bought it, but the local Toyota dealership was charing 400 more for 'Nitrogen Filled Tires', which is a scam to make the dealer more money. But I'll let someone else pay that. Besides, i think the F150 is a better vehicle, anyway.
I recently bought a 2020 Ranger Lariat FX4 super crew. I traded in a 2018 Colorado LT crew cab 4x4. I would definitely recommend the Ranger over the Colorado. The Ranger if definitely quicker and feels like it handles better. The only downside is the price. But all these midsize trucks are more expensive then they should be.
Excellent review and analysis of all three makes/models. Your professional presentation is the best and most complete available. Thank You
Ford has to recognized for the great work with their Eco transmission systems. Great information, thanks!
Toyota lied, didn't hardly do anything to the 2020 Tacoma. Alex you were overly optimistic!
No they didnt lie. They said a refresh, you got a refresh.
@@andybub45 Yes new head lights, power adj. driver seat and android and apple compatibility. Not much of an update.
@@Red.Hot.Chili.Beans63 they added plenty of things for a refresh, especially on the TRD Pro model
Andy's Shop haha... more like a Refr___. Lol
Besides the lights, power seat, apple and android, they also added 360 camera and an all terrain camera that lets you see under and around the truck for obstacles. Toyota has a history of making small improvements to their vehicles so the upcoming refresh was as expected.
"You load sixteen tons, and what do you get?
Another day older and deeper in debt." If you're in your 60s, you'd remember at least some of the lyrics... Great review and video.
Alex, you have this down to a science! Very very polished delivery and preso. Well done! One of the best in the biz. Maybe THE best.
Own a '17 Ridgeline and Alex's comments are spot on.
If you can live with its reduced bed and towing capacity, and your ego comes to terms with its SUV base, Ridgeline is a superior Sport Utility Truck.
that looks like a mini van with a bed.... sorry... comfort or not, the newest ridgelines are sad looking. the older ones are not bad. but they really dropped the ball on the new design, they may as well as put a cap in it and call it a minivan
@@MrMatty1956 Owned many trucks and Ridgeline is the best of the bunch
I know what I want and what I need.. Unlike keyboard warriors.
We're a couple days away from ordering a new Ranger. We own an '02 Tacoma and we've test driven the Colorado. This video is great, thanks for making it. Very informative.
We need the Ford Ranger Raptor and it will be game over for the other mid-size trucks
Next generation, just wait a little bit longer. The refreshed Ranger will bring the Raptor. 👍🏻
The rest of the world doesn’t even like the raptor edition of the ranger. Has a diesel with like 200hp and a little under 400 lb ft torque. F150 raptor lovers would not go for that over here lol
Looks great, Tacoma will have to step its game up!
The mid sized truck category is growing, no reason the Tacoma will not continue selling record numbers along with space for the Ranger to do well too.
Again with the halogen headlights! Good, safe lighting is a safety issue and should not be a cost cutting measure. What is it with various manufacturers giving consumers less safe lighting? Auto makers need to stop cheaping out and provide HID or LED headlights on all cars and trucks as standard, not an option!
LED's are only dangerous because of the wide use of reflectors. LED projectors that are appropriately aimed at the road are no different than halogens.
Halogens are just fine. Brighter lights just blind oncoming traffic and make things less safe for everyone else...
There are laws on headlight brightness that affect manufacturers. Brighter lights are just what assholes install because they dont care about blinding other drivers, because the are assholes.
Agreed. My wife's new Rav4 lighting sucks. It's hard to see at night. A lot of rav4 owners are complaining about it also unless they have the limited or SE which comes with LED or HID. I tried putting in LED bulbs but it made it worse. The beam will shine right into the oncoming traffic drivers vision blinding them so I took them off and put the stock ones back on. I hear it's the cheap projector that toyota uses on the car. For a car compa6that promotes safety I'd expect them to put better headlights on.
I agree. Being able to see is the most important safety factor, I dont need any gadgets. I just wan to see. Make LEDs standard. Plus halogen look horrible.
There are a lot of missed opportunities with this "new" Ranger but sadly the lack of competition and silly Toyota/GM pricing opened the door wide open for Ford.
What were you looking to see?
This entire segment is a joke
whiteandnerdytuba how so?
I agree...Ford phoned it in. They could/should have done better. Not sure what's 'silly' about GM pricing though...seems pretty close to Ranger to me.
N Pooch again, what do you feel they should have done “better”? And done give me some BS about 2.7 V6 this or Raptor that. I mean really about stacking this up against the competition.
I wish they would bring back the little trucks. They were more fun to drive and better on gas. I just need to occasionally haul stuff (not trailer stuff).
I believe Hyundai is coming out with a car based mini truck and I believe Ford is also planning on the same thing.
Basically you suggest to get American brand
I have a 2020 ford ranger wildtrak
Not a fan of turbos, wish they had a V6 available. The 3.3 V6 from the base F-150 would be perfect in this truck.
Agreed completely. The powertrain is my biggest dislike here. Followed by the price lol
3.3 v6 from f150? have you driven a ford lately? ;) yeah i went there. the f150 has a 2.7 lt twin turbo, 3.5 lt twin turbo and the 5.0 v8. Ive always been a "trucks need a v8" guy... until I drove my 2.7 lt turbo... youd never know it wasnt a v8. Ive driven (and ordered) the new ranger. Its pulls much better then any of the v6s in its class and i think better then the 2.7 ford f150. the 3.5 does have a bit better pull, but you're also paying about 20k more to get that...
@@MrMatty1956 I think most people that aren't fans of turbos are concerned with reliability, not performance. At least that's my scenario.
@@kmeekins4168 yup!
@@kmeekins4168 just a thought, turbos are not that hard to change, Im not saying its easy either but there are much harder things to change in a vehicle (i have changed a few in my day but not on ecoboost engines) people are going on like you have to completely disassemble the engine I have the 2.0l in my escape and Im glad I have it.
Nice easter eggs on the song names, always makes me chuckle.
6:55 it's not that the bed is deep , it's only a matter that the truck is stupidly high and so , make the wheel wells not much preominent .
I think unless a smaller exterior footprint is vital......The F-150 gives much more interior space for not a great deal more cash than Ranger.
F150 are actually shipper than the Ranger .
How much do you spend on fuel?
A smaller footprint is vital for many.
Excellent review a lot of useful information but concise. Thank you so much Alex keep up the GREAT work!!
Wow that brake score is bad. Was not expecting that
Alex, thanks for your criticism of the Tacoma at 7:53. I agree 100% and that makes the Tacoma and related 4Runner unacceptably uncomfortable for me. I know those are popular trucks, but I hate that aspect of Toyota truck design.
I find the Tacoma uncomfortable as well. Disagree on the 4Runner though.
Same here. It always struck me as an odd seating position for a truck
@@EdwardEimiller 4runner has the same seating layouts
@Matthew James Maybe so as the Taco usually has about 5 inch ground clearance advantage on its competitors. But that doesn't make it any more comfortable. It's useless ground clearance to me since I can't drive it more than 2 minutes without killing my tailbone and back.
Thats why they added a power seat this year
I like it but don't trust the motor as a pure GDI, even Ford added port injection to the 2.7 and 3.5 EB. I wish the ranger used F150s 3.3 gdi & pfi v6. I'll wait and see but I have been watching new ranger forums for issues.
@@altman5933 it doesn't seem to effect VW
Yeah, I can see this thing suffering from Carbon Buildup issues, do not think it will do well with long term reliability.
I honestly think the 2007-2010 Sport Trac looks better. AND, that model had a V8 option. And I'm wondering how good of mpgs one will see in a gen 2 Sport Trac, if the Ranger Ecoboost engine and the 10 speed were swapped in.
I think the ranger will be a great truck, but I think itll come down to resale value which has to be determined where as the Tacoma retains its value extremely well
1st quarter sales are only 1/6th of the Tacoma..
I heard ok only 16.000 units
Stanley Kania it’s a new truck! The numbers should be way up
Well, Ford refused to give customers an optional engine and a choice of a manual transmission . It’s like Ford said screw you, you’re going to take it or leave it. I’ll leave it.
This is a criminally under rated channel! i love the info, its quick and to the point with everything you want to know. However just in my own opinion when comparing trucks i think its unfair to compare unibody frames to body on frame designs. Also if i could ask for 1 more thing: @12:51 when you start driving the vehicle could we have a camera view from inside the truck, like a dashcam?
At the 2:00 minute mark, you said that there's no reason for compact trucks these days. Well, Ford is coming out with a new unibody Courier pickup really soon.
The Ranger needs an optional 2.7L EcoBoost V6 and/or a 3.2L diesel engine.
Thanks for the vid. The rear seat is totally worthless for not folding flat for anyone who wants to store some tool bags or groceries out of the weather.
I don't want a full size truck because it is just too large for my needs and my garage. That said, I am hoping and waiting for Ford to put the 2.7L Ecoboost into the Ranger. Then it will land in my garage for sure.
Dan Elliott it’s called the Ranger Raptor. Unless they stick the diesel in it?
Wow, great job, great description, you seem to know what your are talking about.
Not when all those turbo charged high pressure 4 cylinders start falling apart as those rangers age.
I think your "Two Cabs, Two Beds, Two Combos," artwork is incorrect. It makes it look like the four-door has the longer bed.
The artwork is right, the wording is wrong
Alex. Amazing review as usual. Great review. No one in the biz is a mellifluous as you are during a review. I don't think you missed a beat. I would have liked to have known how the top spec Lariat 4 wheel drive drove around town? Did you have a chance to test that one and was it as "jumpy", when unloaded, on city and country roads, as this RWD spec?
@Alex on Autos Chevy Colorado Z71 has an automatic locking limited slip rear differential which makes it capable of sending more than 60% of the power to either rear wheel. I know what I’d rather have on an icy surface or a loose dirt road
The locker in Ranger and Colorado locks...which means no more than 50% to each rear wheel. No torque-vectoring here. That said, you will ALWAYS get 50% to each wheel when locked.
Ford builds the best trucks worldwide for 60 years.
I dont think the Ranger will dethrone the Taco but I bet it will steal some sales away from it. For years the taco was left unchallenged. The Frontier was not even on the radar for most midsize truck shoppers. However, if I was in the market for a midsize truck, it'll probably be a ZR2 Colorado or a FX4 Ranger. I've a feeling the Gladiator Rubicon will be too expensive. I test drove a Taco but didnt like it as much.
The Frontier is selling better than the Ranger.
To everyone talking about reliability etc:
We get this (and a SUV body style) in Asia (and SA) with a BRILLIANT I5 diesel. Won't get into the EcoBoost debate, but Rangers and Everests (the upcoming Bronco for you Yanks) here have proven to be just as reliable and more niggle-free than Toyota's popular (and hugely overpriced in some markets) versions of the Tacoma and 4Runner.
And the running conditions here in some areas are really bad.
Ford Australia did a great job engineering this for high temperatures and rough roads. The ride quality on the SUV body style (no leaf springs at the rear) on broken roads has to be experienced to be believed. In terms of dynamics and refinement, this is on a different level from Toyota.
That said, the Isuzu version of the GM Colorado over here, though woefully underpowered, is as reliable as anything else.
Unfortunately, diesel is so much more expensive here in the U.S. than petrol so there just isn't a diesel option for most mini/midsize pickups and SUVs
I'm thinking about selling my '15 Tundra double cab and getting a Ranger. I'm just a dude with a dog. I don't tow anything. I like to go camping, backpacking, fishing, dirt roads, etc. The Tundra is so gigantic and I don't need that much truck at all.
In Thailand, we get the 2 L Bi-Turbo Diesel engine.
Ford never said it replaced the ranger with the fiesta
It was the transit connect if one needed a compact commercial vehicle. Otherwise great Ford thinking told the public if you want a truck the f150 is fine.......after 22 years of being a Ford customer I left and own Chevy Colorado which I am very pleased. Not perfect but at least a great mid size.
As always love Alex's music choices. 😂 🙌
Unlike the Toyota Toluca, these Rangers will all be made in the USA.
Wtf you talking about?
That instrument cluster screen was used in the 2012-2014 Focus and 2013-2016 Escape but after those years they refreshed the graphics. Confused as to why those updated graphics aren’t in the Ranger?
The Ranger is based on A truck first sold in 2012 I believe with some mods for the US market
john cooper I know that but refreshed Escape in 2017 and refreshed Focus in 2015 had been freshened and you’d think it would be simple to produce them with those refreshed graphics.
Cannot wait to pit this against the Gladiator 🤔👏🏽
This Ranger is growing on me: I think it’s the ecoboost.
Thanks Alex!
Well said Caleb. This Ranger has been available overseas for years. The Gladiator is going to have alot of reliability issues. I would buy the new Ford Ranger.
Oh, I bet it’ll be a dumpster fire. I’d pick a Ridgeline for my money 😅, but definitely this would be more reliable than the Jeep. If this had a torque vectoring rear, then it’d be in a new league.
The main difference for America seems to be the gas engine. Most sales worldwide are of diesel versions.
There is soon to be the new option of the EcoBlue diesel 2.0 engines with the ten speed transmission elsewhere, but otherwise not much change apart from the option of a coil sprung rear axle for more performance/lifestyle versions. All versions sold in the UK have a 2300lb payload. There is a special order economy rear axle that is higher geared and which limits the towing capacity to around 6000lbs, down from the standard 7700lbs.
In less than two years time, VW will end the current Amorak production and market a badge engineered Ranger instead.
I like it...I really do like it but I have to say I don't like that an EcoBoost engine is the only engine choice. I'm still a little skeptical with turbo engines even though Ford has probably proven themselves with them. I mean, they put it in their best seller when people were questioning what they were doing. I wish the Ranger had like an NA 3.3L V6 as an option. I don't like how buzzy 4 cylinders can be.
I have to say that I prefer to have a full-size F-150 SuperCrew with the 5.0L V8. It's always been a dream truck of mine especially since they have the 5.0 as an engine choice.
When I looked at Colorado it costs more than the Silverado. Same with the ranger since it doesn't get 14k off MSRP like f150. Gas mileage is the same. There's no point to these unless you just can't handle a real truck.
Not sure about where you live, but Colorados are regularly available for mid-$20K in crew cab/V6 with cloth seats, power opts. Only Silverado you can get for that is reg-cab V6 vinyl seat and crank windows.
N Pooch they both have cloth seats with reasonable toys in the 30.
Kevindust depending on the trim and toys I can believe it
Smaller trucks need to distance themselves MORE from full size. They need to be much smaller, much cheaper, much more efficient, and if that means much less capable, then fine.
There are more than enough people who just need to haul bikes, lawn stuff, small appliances, camping gear, etc., which never weighs more than 750 lb. Cutting the capacity means everything can get smaller/lighter. It won't need such a high ride height. All that improves efficiency and lowers cost.
Many of the Mid-Sized pickup buyers can handle a “real truck” (by this I’m sure you mean a full-size) just fine. It often has to do with Off-Roading on tight trails where a “real truck” won’t fit, maneuverability and parking and just not needing the extra size, payload weight or towing capacity. Insurance and registration is generally cheaper as well.
thanks for this info. I' was feeling overwhelmed with the pricing options of the higher end f150 & f250 and thought maybe the Ranger would be a good option. Price wise its great, but practicality wise for what I need a truck for, it won't work for me. Thank you for helping me make this informed decision
Not sure about discounts in the US, but in many cases up here in Canada it can be cheaper to get into a nicely equipped full size than it is to get into a midsize mid range truck as discounts on full size trucks are usually double that if midsize.
Yea here in Idaho a dealer has a Ranger XLT 4x4 for $40,040 and a F-150 XLT 4x4 with a 5.0L V6 priced at $38,000...so it boils down to what you need it for and if it fits well in your driveway/garage
Anecdotally, I have read hundreds, if not thousands, of comments about problems with ecoboost engines. I’ve been fortunate enough to only break down in one vehicle in my life, which was a Saturn SL1 at 90k miles. I’ve driven my Honda’s and Toyota’s up to 200k miles without issue. I want to make the jump, but I don’t want to be either: broken down, or staring at a costly engine rebuild bill 90k into the life of the truck.
This is why I don’t see lower torque or fuel economy as a disadvantage. If I have to spend $5k to fix an engine at 90k miles, there’s the extra fuel cost, and if I choose the newer tech, it comes with the experience of being broken down on the side of the road.
Have you read about any problems with this particular 2.3l turbo engine? There's a lot of them out there.
@Kevin Schmidt www.jdpower.com/Cars/Ratings/Dependability/2017/Large-Light-Duty-Pickup
www.jdpower.com/Cars/Ratings/Dependability/2018/Large-Heavy-Duty-Pickup
www.jdpower.com/Cars/Ratings/Dependability/2018/Large-SUV
There were some early ecoboast issues that have since been corrected. This problem from what i have seen was corrected by the "catch can" mod which is no longer required. Ford fixed it. I have a 3.5 ecoboost i a 2016 explorer. That engine is so much fun. I had a 2016 5.0 F150. It was fun too, but that 3.5 ecoboost will leave you quite satisfied after overtaking a jerk on the highway. Longevity being your concern, i can only speak to 40000miles. No issues as of yet.
Joe Pah You’re right. I don’t have a lot of hard evidence against this engine. I hear a lot about turbos in general though, and I see how Toyota avoids turbos at all cost. I considered the 5.0 coyote F-150, but I didn’t want/need a 1/2 ton.
benjaminwayneb You linked the HD trucks, which Toyota doesn’t make. I see this report all the time. You didn’t read it. It exactly describes my comment.
Toyota ranks highest in mechanical (engine/drive train/transmission) and lowest in “features.” So when my “features” stop working I can drive to the shop to have them fixed, but when their “mechanical” stops working they’ll be calling a tow truck. The results are literally exactly my comment, “I will trade the extra tech for not being broken down on the side of the road.”
As usual, good review. I would like however, to see braking distance with maximum payload in back.
Wait stop the press I just watched your review of the Colorado ( I was hoping I could get your insight into how the ride on the ZR2 was in comparison to the Ranger ) and in that you said that you had tested a Colorado with the V6 and it got a 0-60 in 6 sec flat beating the Honda Ridgeline. SO which is it is the Colorado faster or the Ranger. I would guess the Ranger but.....And I just moved to the burbs ( unfortunately) and I would love a full size truck but they don't fit in the little garage I got stuck with. Plus these little trucks are a lot better for getting around in the city. I don't want the fake Ridgeline as I still go out to my parents farm and need something that can still haul and tow stuff. I love all the new tech on the Ranger but with the DSSV shocks that the Colorado ZR 2 has I would think it would give a better ride than the Ranger over more different types of terrain. I Don't suppose you could go drive the ZR 2 V6 and remind yourself of that vehicle because it seems like you've forgotten how much you liked it.
You would be surprised how much that 'fake' ridgeline can handle. I get if you don't like the looks of it, but it's capability is not fake. Tell that to the 22 sheets of 3/4's ply and 10 8x10's I hauled in one trip this past summer.
Most reviews coming out now show the Colorado (not in ZR2 trim) is faster by 0.4 sec 0-60. This is what Alex inadvertently found when you take the number from his old video. th-cam.com/video/bDb_oUjI_Uk/w-d-xo.html
I drove one in the city traffic and never got to try sport mode but thought the motor felt anemic in regular mode. Like most modern trucks, it jumped into a higher gear way too soon.
He needs to throw the Ridgeline into the mix. Better mileage and power. Towing is down a bit but the payload is on par and it's just a nicer truck for the money.
You’re opinion. He did plenty of Ridgeline comparisons. It’s a nice SUV, not a truck but most can’t get past the price and the look. Nice try though. . . Move along in your Soccer Mom Pretend Truck
@@deanemberley2333 It's by definition a truck. Look it up in the dictionary. Nowhere does it say it has to have a ladder body on frame and ride like crap. Ridgeline has a 1580 lb payload capacity which is comparable to the Taco and the Chevy twins. 5000 towing capacity which is 1500 lbs more than the SUV Pilot.
I came from a 2011 Tundra and wanted a smaller truck. Compared all of them and chose the RL as it is the best value, was 5 less than the loaded up Ranger and Canyon and will be running far longer with less hassle than those. I wanted to love the Ranger but it is cheap inside and cramped. All Ford did was bring over an old truck from other parts of the world and slapped some new bits on it. Fail.
Justin Fontaine it’s not a fail. It’s been proven for years overseas. I first saw it while working in the Philippines and South Africa. Foreign Work colleagues recommended them. Also, no way you can get a RL where I live for cheaper. You also have no proof it will last longer or be problematic. Good for you though. Anyway you are just making blanket statements with nothing but anecdotal evidence.
No one ever mentions the fuel type required in these reviews. You use 87 octane in this truck even though it has a turbo. Thats very good on the wallet as well.
Its also funny you say RWD I ONLY see a 4X4 option and it is listed as standard on all Rangers. Where did you find a 2WD Ranger?
i like the proportions on this truck much more than the colorado/canyon, this one has normal pickup proportions and shapes, the colorado has a weirdly huge bed and a really low cab that slants downward towards the front, it looks strange.
Should stop comparing the Honda to any truck. It is not a truck. It's a car with an open trunk.
And stop talking HP. Torque is what get the work done and is the main factor for any truck. HP is theoretical. Torque is actual capability
So short cab is Long bed
And long bed is short cab??
Informative, to the point of being exhaustive. Nicely done.
Buying a new vehicle is a most costly mistake. Initial depreciation is astounding.
Alex is the most thorough and efficient reviewer around. I have a different perspective on his comments about leasing around 20:20, as he stated that resale value is not related to lease price. In fact, lease pricing is based on the resale value (aka residual value) at the end of the lease, typically 3 years in duration. So for two vehicles with the same initial price, the one with better resale value will have a lower monthly lease cost. Similarly, one can lease a more expensive car with great resale value for the same amount or less than a vehicle with lower price but lower resale value. This later example was real for me when I was comparing Acura TSX vs. Mazda 6 back in 2009. I agree with Alex that if you keep a car for 10 years, then just get what you like best.
So why would I want ANY mid size pick up when milage is about the same as a full size? What? You want to save garage space? My F150 eco boost is averaging 20 mpg, and i have more room for gear and more comfort
in my situation I dont need a full size truck, a mid sized would be perfect this meets my needs, when the time is right ill get one
You might not, but buyers of mid-sizes do it for Off-Roading prowess, maneuverability and ease of parking and those types of reasons. Also I think this Ranger is showing a few more MPG combined avg. than 20.
i heard what he said he got in the review, which if true is impressive.But EPA are making the auto makers put accurate mileage ratings which is nothing close to what he said. If they did get 30 on the highway, then im onboard. i guess if you live in urban areas where parking is tight? @@brodiwheeler7583
pahuntnut 30 would be hard to believe, did he say close to 30? Like 26/27 maybe 28? It’s impressive MPG even at 23 Combined. Impressive Torque and HP and 10-spd tranny... I’m just not down with the turbo motor.
There’s several trails here in Colorado where a full-size truck is just to big to make it up... and many more where it might make it, but it’s coming home with some new pinstripes for sure! That’s the Off-Road advantage of a mid-size truck.
Very good review as always.
Alex reeeeaalllllyyy wants to go right this time
In my place the EVEREST/ENDEAVOUR also has a diesel engine 3.2 5cyl and 2 ltr bi turbo with more than 550 nm torque available from 1500 revvs ... Y theres no diesel in america
Cost of diesel...currently in my state gasoline is $2.85/US gallon vs. diesel @4.05/gallon
Saw Ranger this past weekend. Disappointed. Interior cramped compared to Colorado (especially front head room), cupholders and window switches too far back, gas tank too small, no NA V-6 option, no crew longbed option...simply didn't feel anywhere as comfortable as the Colorado.
Wow!!! A truly honest review - thanks............
The new ford ranger 4×4 with a 4cylinder? I owened a 1984 ranger 4×4 with 6cylinder it was a stupid decision who thought of only releasing a 4cylinder 4×4 truck not giving the option of a 6cylinder totall dummy could only think of releasing just a 4cylinder...
reg cab, long bed, manual transmission option please
I suspect more optional configuations will come, but at launch, they are keeping it simple. Early indications are that they will not be able to build enough to meet demand.
alliejr I admire your optimism. I feel there will be no additional cab configurations or drivetrain options. They may add another engine to the lineup but manual trans and regular cab are very much dead here.
The Chevy Colorado does that on base models
elai314 Amen!
@@alliejr I hope to see a Limited and Raptor version with all the options on F-150. Probably not before 2021.
I like the Ranger. I am still scared of a turbo charged direct injected engine. I don't want a turbo from anybody. You got 32mpg highway? That is quite a bit higher than the EPA estimates. That is quite impressive. I have known some guys with the Toyota trucks and those trucks run forever. One guy I know had well over 200,000 miles and never turned a wrench on the engine.
I like the way you explain very detailed
I actualy like the rear end, but I'm just not a fan of that front end
Taco will still be the sales leader.
Not a chance!
No its glory days are over the Ranger is back to take its crown back
You probably right that way they haven't had a new Tacoma in a while.
The 3rd Generation Tacoma just came out 2016, a refresh in 2020 will have it keep its crown as best seller.
Until Ford does a full redesign for the Ranger, Tacoma will outsell it. We will see at the end of March what q1 looks like since ford doesn’t report sales monthly anymore.
Alex I wish you was testing the lariat I'm driving that now and the steering wheel and the display is different on it
A great review, and what a beautiful place to live!
How will the turbo charged engine perform at high elevation? I live at 6500 ft
The replacement was the Fiesta? What? How so?
I had to listen to that twice. I don't understand that comment either. I like Alex, but the editing was odd, his measurements were off, the Fiesta comment, and it actually can have a brake controller installed by Ford. 🤷🏼♂️
Great video. Very informative .
Make that rear seat a foldable 60/40 split already! I can’t tell you how many times I fold down my rear seat to avoid the rain when buying items. Why would you want to put something heavy on your nice fancy leather seats? Fix that and I’m in
True the high trim ranger gets expensive. The full sized f150 is a real truck. The Ranger is a great truck,but won’t take the punishment and abuse of a full size pu.
We already know the Taco will hold it's resale value.
Beware the Taco, don't get one someone "ragged out".
Who cares. I buy a truck to drive and use. Why I sold my old Ranger with over 130,000 carefree miles I got top dollar.
If the Chinese want to make headway in the US market, they need a small, reliable pickup and a small SUV based on such truck.
Hyundai small truck incoming
@@82mattlopez Not a true truck, more like based on the Tucson
@@mikemorales1725 just like the Ridgeline. Ifs it small it will be unibody
9:42 Good song choice.
The Fiesta was the replacement for the Ranger? Huh? In what universe does that make anything close to sense?
I'm torn. I want a GMC Canyon Denali but there are also things I like about the new Ranger...but I don't like the looks of the Ranger as much as the Canyon Denali. And I'd rather have a strong non-turbo V6 too. Hmmm (currently own a 2014 F150 with the 3.5 twin turbo).
I wish ford used the base f150 engine. The 3.3 v6 290hp and paired it with the 10 speed.
im sort of in the same boat, i wanted to get a ranger and was waiting for it to come out, but now i think its kinda underwhelming. I'm now leaning towards the Ridgeline just for practicality and comfort. I too have a 2014 F150, but i have the 5.0. its a super crew long bed fx4...i only average 13ish though, with 15 highway...so i wanted a mid side for better mpg. What do you get with the 3.5?
@@lonespartan31289 Back and forth to work during summer (warm weather time of year), I average around 16.7 MPG (all stock and I'm not too easy on the pedal). Trip is about 35 miles and about 60% of that is highway and 40% backroads with about 9 stops (lights/signs). If I'm on the highway on a pretty flat stretch I can easily get near 20 MPG. Winter months the MPG for me drops to around 15.5 MPG back and forth to work. It's a 4x4 super cab with 6.5' bed.
@@LukeO-1234 That sounds like a good idea.
@@ThePhotographyHobbyist that's not bad. I know the newer trucks with the 10 speed get pretty good mpg and so i was hoping the ranger would be better. The canyon/ colorado aren't to bad mpg wise either but i hate the interior of the Colorado. The Denali is nice but pricey.
Has a catfish style front end
Mazda should bring back the B2000. They were popular with contractors in the 80's/90's.
Since 2011, the Mazda BT-50 has been the Ford Ranger's twin, sold overseas, except for Japan, which is strange.
Mazda switched to Isuzu for their BT-50.
www.caranddriver.com/news/a15346319/mazda-picks-isuzu-as-pickup-partner/