New Gen Ranger. First impressions

[Cowabunga]

After less than 100 miles and only four hours studying and driving...

Fetched my new red Ranger 2.0 Wildtrak today.
Slightly disappointed that it hasn’t got the USB up by the mirror but I knew it didn’t have the wireless charging, inverter, auxiliary switches and surround cameras. These don’t add up to anything like the £750 that the unwanted 20” tyres cost. That is how it was ordered for stock and none of it is a dealbreaker.

Surprised that it does have a heated windscreen, as that is not mentioned in the specifications.

Disappointed slightly that it does not have the adjustable heavy duty side rail tie-down points in the bed like my 2014 Ranger.

Drives very nicely indeed after I figured out the functions available on the electronic gear selector. Nice.

Not so great is that on the way home the tyre pressure monitor system developed a fault and has remained faulty to this evening. Apparently I must refer to a dealer, but this is not a critical function for me and is easily banished from the screen when the banner pops up.

Adaptive cruise control works just as well as on a Volvo, Kia or BMW. The lane keep assist is more subtle than the others but works well, but it doesn’t semi-auto-steer like the others with the package I’ve bought. It’s more than enough though.

Engine lovely and quiet while being more than adequately powerful. It also shows great economy potential, travelling 45 miles on undulating West Wales roads this evening and keeping up with traffic, it already shows 34mpg with less than a total of 100 miles on the clock.

The ride and handling and refinement is great for a pickup and long may it remain so.

There’s no speedometer of the analogue style that I’ve yet found. The digital is fine though and I quite like the uncluttered look that is possible to set.

One rather major item that Ford has disabled is the keyless entry. Apparently the hardware is all there but it was too easy and common for thieves to scan the key remotely from outside the house at night and drive away with the vehicle. Hopefully there will be an update soon that restores that rather nice functionality, because I’m used to it on other cars dating back further than my wife’s 2015 Honda CR-V.

The American ‘receiver’ type tow hitch is a bit of an abomination. The drawbar is a loose fit [it rattles] and only held on by one rather small pin that is only held in place by an R clip. It has advantages I guess, in that it is easily removable and can be replaced by a winch or something. It extends further rearwards than usual, which will give a greater degree of manoeuvrability turning in reverse. I prefer, admittedly with zero actual experience as yet, the really solid heavy duty factory hitch fitted to my 2014 Ranger.

That’s my first day’s impression, having collected it at about 2.30pm.

 

[Cowabunga]

Another thing I have noticed is that the Ranger has an electrical/electronic brake servo/master cylinder, identical in principle to the device that failed on my 1998 Land Cruiser due to its excessive replacement cost. One can only hope that 25 years of development has resulted in a device that lasts 400,000 miles rather than 200,000.

 

[Lakesdigger]

Out of interest and assuming it's not the only towbar available double check the towing capacity rating of the removable hitch.

 

[Jerry]

I read in another forum there’s a anti rattle bolt that can be inserted in the hitch to stop the rattle.

 

[flinty123]

Fords are good for owner drivers who love and care for them, put them into a fleet with multiple drivers and make them work, they fall apart like a cheap lego set.

I talk from experience having run transits and rangers. The new Ranger will be no different from its predecessors, they are designed to fail.

We have a 10 year old Hilux on the fleet, it has outlived 3 newer Rangers and Transits.

 

[Johnnyboxer]

Fords are good for owner drivers who love and care for them, put them into a fleet and make them work, they fall apart like a cheap lego set.

I talk from experience having run transits and rangers. The new Ranger will be no different from its predecessors, they are designed to fail.

We have a 10 year old Hilux on the fleet, it has outlived 3 newer Rangers and Transits.

But the Duck doesn't like Hilux and finds them inferior & uncomfortable

 

[Tucker]

As we used to say on the Navara forum, if there's no pictures, it didn't happen. !!!!
I'll be interested to hear what is said about the Ranger. I've always had Navara's, not strictly a work vehicle, but covers many bases. My N-Guard will be 3 years old in March so I would normally change it. A decision will have to be made though as the N-Guard (top of the range) was around £27K, the Ranger Platinum I believe is £44K plus !!!!! (not a fan of the hi-lux and VW even more expensive).

 

[Cowabunga]

Out of interest and assuming it's not the only towbar available double check the towing capacity rating of the removable hitch.

It is 3500kgs rated.

 

[Cowabunga]

I read in another forum there’s a anti rattle bolt that can be inserted in the hitch to stop the rattle.

Yes there are anti-rattle bolts that replace the simple pin and they work by pulling the drawbar hard to one side. Getting a properly rated and approved one may be tricky. It should be standard fitting because this stanard pin could easily lose its R clip and fall out in my opinion.

 

[Cowabunga]

But the Duck doesn't like Hilux and finds them inferior & uncomfortable

Just look at Australian reviews and comparisons of both trucks. While the HiLux has a loyal following, so does the Ranger and it is fast overtaking HiLux sales with both good short and long term reviews.
My own 2014 Ranger has worked exceptionally hard and continues to to so with the only significant issue and cost over nine years being five broken rear springs, which is probably an indication of the work it does.

 

[Magnus Oyke]

They're just chrome laden cod pieces driven, around here anyway, by aggressive bellends. Most of them just get used to intimidate vulnerable road users, park on the pavement and pull a jetski. They're physically too big with a load bed that is too high and too small.

 

[Cowabunga]

They're just chrome laden cod pieces driven, around here anyway, by aggressive bellends. Most of them just get used to intimidate vulnerable road users, park on the pavement and pull a jetski. They're physically too big with a load bed that is too high and too small.

Oddly, in over 45 years of driving, ten years commercially in sales, I’ve never ever been intimidated by another road user. If someone is desperate to pass, make room for them and let them pass. It’s that easy. They are big because they carry five people in reasonable comfort [although mine is usually full of the tools of my trade] plus has a five foot bed in the back which accommodated a big round or square bale or a tote bag or a 1000litre IBC with ease. They also tow 3.5 tons regularly around these parts and during the tourist off-season every fifth vehicle seems to be a pickup towing a livestock, flatbed or plant trailer.
You must live in some very urban area or just have not got the work for such a truck. Or maybe too much work for one and you run HGV’s?

Whatever, I can tell that a one ton five seater pickup is not for you, and that’s OK. Buy what suits you and let others do the same. As yet nobody forces anyone to buy something they do not want.

 

[Cowabunga]

As we used to say on the Navara forum, if there's no pictures, it didn't happen. !!!!
I'll be interested to hear what is said about the Ranger. I've always had Navara's, not strictly a work vehicle, but covers many bases. My N-Guard will be 3 years old in March so I would normally change it. A decision will have to be made though as the N-Guard (top of the range) was around £27K, the Ranger Platinum I believe is £44K plus !!!!! (not a fan of the hi-lux and VW even more expensive).

You will be lucky to get a Platinum for £44k. However, do you actually need such a high specification vehicle? If not, they start at around £30k for 170hp manual version. Probably less.

 

[Drillman]

Must admit the new ranger looks nice, especially in that metallic red colour.

I too am a skeptic of that detachable tow hitch though and would prefer the solid girder type like the one on the ranger I currently own.

 

[toquark]

I'd like a review of the 3l V6 model. The 2.0 twin turbo is a good motor by all accounts, but when faced with the choice between that and a V6, I'd go V6 every time.

 

[Cowabunga]

I'd like a review of the 3l V6 model. The 2.0 twin turbo is a good motor by all accounts, but when faced with the choice between that and a V6, I'd go V6 every time.

One has to wonder ‘why’ if the 2.0 is more than powerful enough, £3k cheaper, very refined and cheaper on fuel and to insure than the six cylinder. Also cheaper to service and, assuming that they are equally reliable [or unreliable] cheaper to repair. The 2.0 is also lighter weight and mounted quite far back in the engine bay for better weight distribution.
I’m not saying that the V6 is a bad choice and I’m sure it is very nice and does have 100 Nm more torque but the 2.0 has itself 100Nm more than my old Land Cruiser Amazon 100 series, which I never found wanting, 500Nm verses 400Nm. Indeed the comparison with the 4.2 litre Toyota which is 200hp 400Nm is particularly interesting because the 2.0 Ranger has far better performance, equal second row legroom and, very significantly, does 34mpg compared with 24mpg.

Indeed if one was available I would have bought a V6 Titanium. Not because I need one but because I’m a sucker for gadgets and that model comes even more stuffed with them and only comes with the V6.

 

[Magnus Oyke]

Oddly, in over 45 years of driving, ten years commercially in sales, I’ve never ever been intimidated by another road user. If someone is desperate to pass, make room for them and let them pass. It’s that easy. They are big because they carry five people in reasonable comfort [although mine is usually full of the tools of my trade] plus has a five foot bed in the back which accommodated a big round or square bale or a tote bag or a 1000litre IBC with ease. They also tow 3.5 tons regularly around these parts and during the tourist off-season every fifth vehicle seems to be a pickup towing a livestock, flatbed or plant trailer.
You must live in some very urban area or just have not got the work for such a truck. Or maybe too much work for one and you run HGV’s?

Whatever, I can tell that a one ton five seater pickup is not for you, and that’s OK. Buy what suits you and let others do the same. As yet nobody forces anyone to buy something they do not want.

You might have done 45 years of driving, but I'll wager you haven't done 45 minutes cycling and had Captain Roid Rage in his Ford Wife Beater pickup rubbing the back wheel of your bike and beeping his horn at you for having the temerity to turn left on your drive. Mind you, I did meet the fat, ginger, pansy on the tractor when I had the drill on the back, and accidentally forced him into the ditch. Another one of the heros around here was often seen driving his pickup in a manner more suited to a Subaru WRX and funnily enough, it ended up in the ditch with a spectacular amount of damage. I suppose driven hard, it might just be able to keep up with a mid range Fiesta.

These pickups are too fragile to load with a forklift, and too high to load them by hand, and you can only load the from the back, nicely hitting you shin on the tow hitch. Is the load bed much bigger than a 19080's VW Caddy? Probably nothing like as big as a Peugeot 504 pickup. I hear on the radio ads that they can now accomidate a Europallet. Wow, like a Transit Connect. Funnily enough,, on the crew cabs, most of the load bed is to the rear of the back axle, so presumably they offer a set of front weight on the option list, not that many of them actually carry anything other than the drivers attitude problems.

That 3.5 tonne towing capacity, coupled with a throbbing 2 litre engine must make for a formidable haulage vehicle, ideal towing the badly/barely strapped on mini digger of questionable provenance, to the ropey Ifor Williams with a couple of lights working and 2 legal tyres.

Aside from some off road ability, I really can't see that they would off me much if I needed a work truck, a quite large vehicle with a small, awkward, insecure load area. Arm oot.

 

[Cowabunga]

Aside from some off road ability, I really can't see that they would off me much if I needed a work truck, a quite large vehicle with a small, awkward, insecure load area. Arm oot.

Goodbye.

 

[toquark]

One has to wonder ‘why’ if the 2.0 is more than powerful enough, £3k cheaper, very refined and cheaper on fuel and to insure than the six cylinder. Also cheaper to service and, assuming that they are equally reliable [or unreliable] cheaper to repair. The 2.0 is also lighter weight and mounted quite far back in the engine bay for better weight distribution.
I’m not saying that the V6 is a bad choice and I’m sure it is very nice and does have 100 Nm more torque but the 2.0 has itself 100Nm more than my old Land Cruiser Amazon 100 series, which I never found wanting, 500Nm verses 400Nm. Indeed the comparison with the 4.2 litre Toyota which is 200hp 400Nm is particularly interesting because the 2.0 Ranger has far better performance, equal second row legroom and, very significantly, does 34mpg compared with 24mpg.

Indeed if one was available I would have bought a V6 Titanium. Not because I need one but because I’m a sucker for gadgets and that model comes even more stuffed with them and only comes with the V6.

I've always preferred bigger engines in diesels particularly ones asked to tow a lot and often as mine is. I had a 3.0 Hilux and currently the 3.2 ranger. My experience of working with the 1.9 Isuzu and even the the 2.4 Hilux has led me to question the wisdom of small engines in big vehicles. They definitely aren't any better on fuel and they are constantly working hard, bigger engined vehicles tend to be quieter and more pleasant things to drive, I keep my pickups for at least 8 or 9 years and will easily do 180,000 miles in that time, so I need something that isn't going to blow through turbos or sh!t itself after 100,000 miles. Like I say, I hear a lot of good things about the 2.0 Ranger, but given the choice, it would be the v6 for me.

 

[Cowabunga]

I've always preferred bigger engines in diesels particularly ones asked to tow a lot and often as mine is. I had a 3.0 Hilux and currently the 3.2 ranger. My experience of working with the 1.9 Isuzu and even the the 2.4 Hilux has led me to question the wisdom of small engines in big vehicles. They definitely aren't any better on fuel and they are constantly working hard, bigger engined vehicles tend to be quieter and more pleasant things to drive, I keep my pickups for at least 8 or 9 years and will easily do 180,000 miles in that time, so I need something that isn't going to blow through turbos or sh!t itself after 100,000 miles. Like I say, I hear a lot of good things about the 2.0 Ranger, but given the choice, it would be the v6 for me.

The current 2.0 bi-turbo [sounds like it is in transition and demanding its own pronoun ] is a better performer than the old 3.2 by far when towing according to tests I’ve seen. Will try to find one and post below. Found it. Towing the same 3.2 ton trailer there’s an easy winner...

One has to wonder, when is enough really enough? Yes I’d buy the V6 but the 2.0 blows my 4.2 turbo intercooler Land Cruiser out of the water in every conceivable way except for the unproven one, which is ultimate longevity. Time will tell on that one but both the V6 and this I4 have had a chequered early history. Both have been in production for over five years now though and both have been modified during that time to address issues, as indeed has the ten speed auto. The automatic has well over a million examples in service now of course.