gregsfc

It's a mixed bag, and when we're comparing Ranger to F150 in this context, it's the most basic truck one can buy of each. Everyone keeps saying that full-size trucks are getting too big, and therefore, folks should consider a mid-sized truck for a little less money; and maybe full size trucks are getting to big, but I think what most people really mean when they state that they are too big is that the very elaborate FX4 crew cab with 20+" wheels that are so popular, that those trucks are getting too big. The most basic version of the full size; the RCSB 2WD has also gotten bigger, but are they really that much bigger than one of the smallest mid-sized trucks on the market; the new Ford Ranger.

First for dimensions. The RCSB F150 is 6.6" wider excluding mirrors, and so that measure makes the full size a much wider truck (73.3 versus 79.9). The F150 is also taller in their lowest available stance they are 4.6" apart (although the F150 long bed is slightly shorter than the RCSB). But for length, the base SCab Ranger is actually a little longer by virtue of offering only a SCab as the least cab option. The difference is 1.5" that the Ranger out lengths the least F150. The Ranger also has a longer base wheel base at 4.4" longer than the shortest length F150.

Weight. So it is true that the Ranger has a smaller footprint overall mostly due to the much wider stance, but it is not true regarding weight; at least not comparing leastest to leastest. The F150 with the base 3.3L actually has a base curb weight 76 pounds lighter than the base Ranger (4069 versus 4145); and comparing lightest turbo charged to turbo charged, the F150 weighs only 21 pounds more with V6 arrangement and two turbos and larger displacement versus Ranger's 2.3L I4 Ecoboost; both with the ten speed (4166 versus 4145). And even if we compare the most basic F150 with the 5.0L Coyote, the Ranger is only 108 pounds lighter (4253 versus 4145).

Price. I'll just throw these out there and let you all decide, but one thing is for sure; it is these low-end trucks where the best value lies considering there are Rangers on dealers lots priced over $47K and F150s on lots for more than $70K, and these base priced trucks have most all the same auto engineering, safety, performance and can often-times do more work than the most luxurious versions that eliminate most of the payload via the weight of the so-called tool that we call a pickup truck. The F150 gives up a small rear seat for a wider and longer bed by several inches and 6", respectively. The base price including destination are: Ranger $25,245 (rear seat delete); F150 3.3L/6speed $29,750; 2.7L Ecoboost/10 speed $30,745; 5.0L V8/10 speed $31,745. The only option Ranger has in it's most basic form that F150 does not is power windows and door locks.

How about mpg. Well the Ranger wins the gas powered championship of all trucks; not just from Ford, but the margin is very narrow. Ranger's top number is 21/26/23; F150 with the 2.7L Ecoboost is tied for 2nd place of all gas powered trucks. It can be had as high as 20/26/22 (I've got one and have averaged 24 lifetime, measuring tank-to-tank but mine was the 1st generation mated to 6-speed rated at 19/26/22), and so F150 with the 2.7L is just barely beat out by Ranger but with the same highway rating. The 3.3L can achieve a 19/25/22 estimate, and the Coyote, 17/23/19.

So is the Ranger a smaller, lighter, cheaper alternative in a pickup truck than a full size like the F150? It's not as clear as it may seem if one considers work trucks into the equation. It depends upon what dimensions one needs it to be smaller in to fit his or her needs, and how much one needs the extra bed space of a full size. The Ranger does come up to meeting the capability numbers of these low-end F150s except for bed volume, length, and width, as Ranger's payload and tow max numbers are 1860 and 7500; my truck is 1820 and 8000; but those bed dimensions may be worth $4-$5K for some customers; maybe not for others.

OEFVETF150lover

throw a v8 into a ranger and Im game !
im sorry ford disregarded the sport truck segment.
we need a new generation of SVT lightening !

acdii

Ranger is the NEW 1/2 ton, F150 is the NEW 3/4 ton. When you think about it now, those "ratings" are meaningless. There are F150s that can haul a ton and a half in the bed! For City Folk the Ranger is the perfect medium for them. Easy to get around in the city with, park, and have cargo area for things that just wont fit an SUV or car.

Sgb020

The problem with the new ranger is the price. I think most people would rather get the f150 for the money. I'm pretty sure a lariat ranger is close to an xlt f150. Plus resale for f150 is always going to be a lot better.

G-Force

Add HDPP to a low-end F-150 and the payload comparisons are not even close.

C17chief

Not a fan. Even if a smaller lighter duty truck fits your hauling/towing/carrying needs...unless you absolutely need the smaller dimensions or just can’t handle something larger, I see no point. Until they start putting ~ $10k discounts on them like the F150’s usually have, a comparable F150 is actually cheaper, nicer, and gets just as good MPG.

Sgb020

I agree with c17 I thin k the ranger will be a flop unless they rebate them a lot!

2017bluetruck

When I ordered my 2017 XL RCSB I wanted the smallest Ford truck by exterior size and weight. And I did a lot of looking at the T6 European Ranger that is essentially the US 2019 Ranger. For a width increase of 9% and way less % overall height I got a shorter lighter vehicle with 17% wider interior. Curent base price for bottom line Ranger $24300, F150 $28.155
I consider my F150 XL to be smaller, lighter. Price at base is 15% more for the F150 but there is much more discount bargaining ability in the F15 than the Ranger that goes a long way to equalize the prices. Considering the interior shoulder width 17% increase and 24% larger bed volume the F150 rates as smaller lighter and less expensive, so I ordered in 2017 as there was not need to wait for the Ranger. KM

SPOAT

Some of the benefits of the smaller truck are things like ease of parking and garage space. The Rangers are very maneuverable and fun to drive in traffic and crowded situations where difficult parking is a chore sometimes (IE ballgames, etc). They are great in the woods and running cow trails.

I'd still rather have my RCSB, but we still have an older Ranger and we love it. The RCSB is a bargain for what you get.

I wish my big F150 would fit into my garage. I can squeeze her in, but it's a nightmare to get in and out.

Scrappy Doo

iTrader: (1)

I would get a zr2 Colorado before the ranger. This ranger is a phoned in, stop gap kind of truck. Once the redesign/actual ranger comes out, I'll look at one.

Nissan sold more Frontiers so far this year and that thing hasn't had a refresh for 15 years