User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 8:50:32 PM EDT
I know it is not a revelation, but I noticed this current generation (not sure which exact year) Ranger XLT parked next to my 1998 Ranger XLT. I was struck by the size difference. The newer truck looks much bigger when next to my 98. I can easily reach into the bed of my Ranger, not so much on that current style. It seems as big as an F-150 from 1998. I am not knocking the new Ranger, I am sure it is nice, but in a considerably larger package.
 Attached File |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 8:51:58 PM EDT
[#1]
I miss those size Rangers. Had a 93 Splash. Been looking for another w/ a 4.0. Almost impossible to find around here unless it's beat to hell.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 8:53:03 PM EDT
[#2]
I still have an 01 2500HD. The 1/2 ton trucks dwarf it now.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 8:53:10 PM EDT
[#3]
I would love to have a 98 Ranger with the 2.7 in it.
|
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 8:55:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Echd]
[#4]
I drive an f150. I always really liked rangers and considered them. When buying a newer modern truck I could not grasp the rationale in purchasing anything smaller than a half ton at current pricing unless perhaps you had an extremely niche (off roading / racing) plan for it.
In the past the smaller Rangers and s10s seemed to have a more obvious niche. Even though half tons were also smaller then, it seemed like a larger graduation- and the price difference was more substantial. Nevermind that you're hardly giving up any and sometimes you aren't giving up any gas mileage to go with a half ton over a compact nowadays... You don't really see many of the older Rangers and the like for sale anymore. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 8:58:05 PM EDT
[#5]
The new Rangers are barely smaller than my 1990 F-150. It's only a couple of inches smaller in every direction.
|
|
|
|
AK, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 8:59:02 PM EDT
[Last Edit: feetpiece]
[#6]
My 94 F-150 standard cab longbed feels tiny in parking lots.
|
|
|
GA, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 8:59:04 PM EDT
[#7]
Just wait till you see the difference in size between the 72 maverick and the current ones.
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 8:59:05 PM EDT
[#8]
Yep.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:02:04 PM EDT
[#9]
Exactly why I bought a new Maverick last year. 4,000 pound tow rating, AWD, 4 doors and the Ecoboost motor that gets 30mpg. I don’t need a huge truck to tow my little 17’ flats boat here in flat Florida. 27.3k brand new.
 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:02:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Never_A_Wick]
[#10]
|
|
|
|
TN, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:04:10 PM EDT
[#11]
Now do Tacomas
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:05:45 PM EDT
[#12]
It’s because it’s cheaper for the manufacturers to make the trucks bigger than it is to make them more fuel efficient
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:05:54 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mustb123: Exactly why I bought a new Maverick last year. 4,000 pound tow rating, AWD, 4 doors and the Ecoboost motor that gets 30mpg. I don’t need a huge truck to tow my little 17’ flats boat here in flat Florida. 27.3k brand new. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/126943/2DF2E86C-0FB2-44FD-97A3-7309CD9A719A-3197933.jpg My 98 Ranger does what I need a truck for, but your Maverick is nice, I even like the color. If I had to get a new truck, it would be a Maverick. 
|
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:07:32 PM EDT
[#14]
Now do a 70's ford ranger
|
|
|
WI, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:08:20 PM EDT
[#15]
God forbid you have a truck where you can reach over the side of the bed
|
|
|
CYM
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:08:35 PM EDT
[#16]
The first generation new Ranger i sat in had a tiny interior, New Raptor so costly, im thinking about the Ranger Raptor, but worried instead of right sized people might think its gay
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:11:01 PM EDT
[#17]
I had a 91, 95, and 98 Ranger, great little trucks. New ones are not "compact" nor "mid-sized" anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:14:53 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Gtdhw]
[#18]
Originally Posted By RV8guy: I would love to have a 98 Ranger with the 2.7 in it. My dd ‘97 2.3 5spd  Attached File |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:18:16 PM EDT
[#19]
 90’s Time Capsule // 1994 Ford Ranger 4x4 Review |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:19:26 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Gtdhw: My dd '97 2.3 5spd https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/172459/IMG_1589_jpeg-3197948.JPG  |
|
|
|
GA, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:19:41 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By captexas: I had a 91, 95, and 98 Ranger, great little trucks. New ones are not "compact" nor "mid-sized" anymore. We had a 93 and a 94. 1 of them extended cab with the jump seats and a V6, the other one with the 2.3, both manual transmission. The 2.3L one became my first vehicle when I turned 16. That was a fun little ride. Both of them had brake problems. The V6 one, the ABS light was permanently on. The other one, there was a parking brake recall. Nobody told us about it. The truck ended up totalling itself with no driver in it when the parking brake shat the bed. I straightened the bed a bit and drove it around for the next several years with a bent frame and a smashed bed.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:19:49 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Gtdhw: My dd ‘97 2.3 5spd https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/172459/IMG_1589_jpeg-3197948.JPG Very nice! I bought my 98 from my mom a few years after my dad passed away. She had not really been keeping it up, so I had to put $4k in repairs and "deferred maintenance" into the truck. It is mechanically sound, still has the original paint and wheels. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:23:06 PM EDT
[#23]
 Love this thing. |
|
|
|
MT, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:30:14 PM EDT
[#24]
 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:31:54 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Gspointer: I still have an 01 2500HD. The 1/2 ton trucks dwarf it now. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:34:05 PM EDT
[#26]
The Ranger and Colorado are the same size as full size trucks from 10-15 years ago.
When I finally replace my 14 Titan, I will most like step "down" to a Ranger. They are basically the same size. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:37:42 PM EDT
[#27]
Those old 4.0s were as fast through the 1/4 as a stock Mustang.
|
|
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:38:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: FMJshooter]
[#28]
Bed rail heights on all trucks are kind of retarded now, used to be able to just sling a bag of feed over the side, now you have to military press it in.
I get why but it's still annoying. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:43:03 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Ohiogators]
[#29]
The only brand new vehicle I’ve ever purchased was a 97 Ranger extended cab 4x4.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:46:52 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryNice pics, looks like a beautiful place. As for the size comparisons, new trucks are like walls on wheels. Fucking slabsides, whale shark mouths. Not that I dislike them, but I do like a compact truck. Honestly I've been considering one of those imported, older Japanese mini trucks. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:52:45 PM EDT
[#31]
Looks like a 4wd next to a 2wd.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 9:57:54 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By FMJshooter: Bed rail heights on all trucks are kind of retarded now, used to be able to just sling a bag of feed over the side, now you have to military press it in. I get why but it's still annoying. Uhmm…Why? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 10:03:50 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Prae: I miss those size Rangers. Had a 93 Splash. Been looking for another w/ a 4.0. Almost impossible to find around here unless it's beat to hell. There is a reason you're not finding 4.0s... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 10:05:55 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mustb123: Exactly why I bought a new Maverick last year. 4,000 pound tow rating, AWD, 4 doors and the Ecoboost motor that gets 30mpg. I don’t need a huge truck to tow my little 17’ flats boat here in flat Florida. 27.3k brand new. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/126943/2DF2E86C-0FB2-44FD-97A3-7309CD9A719A-3197933.jpg My wife has a 2024 Maverick. My daughter has a 2002 Sport Trac and my son has 1994, 1996 and 1997 Rangers. It's interesting to see the spread of size. I think Ford nailed it with the Maverick. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 10:13:54 PM EDT
[#35]
Man now I’m sad cause I sold my 05 Ranger recently. Love them little trucks.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 10:18:04 PM EDT
[#36]
Yea, the new ones resemble the SportsTrac size if you ask me...
I've literally walked up to them parked at the supermarket and tried to get a good look at them. But they want so much for them, Idk, for a basic F-150, Idk if it's even worth spending on a new Ranger. If/when I have to get a new vehicle, I am considering getting one. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 10:18:07 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Rudukai13: It’s because it’s cheaper for the manufacturers to make the trucks bigger than it is to make them more fuel efficient Exactly. I heard somewhere that the new emission laws make it way more expensive to manufacture smaller trucks so they just made the trucks bigger to get around it. |
|
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 10:19:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: FMJshooter]
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Bronsonburner: Uhmm…Why? Aerodynamics plus funky spring rates to provide decent ride with a high pay load. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 10:20:03 PM EDT
[Last Edit: OregonShooter]
[#39]
The 1994 Ranger was 69.4" wide.
2024 Ford Maverick is 72.4" wide The current ranger is 79" wide. Current F150 is 80" wide as full size trucks have been for decades. CAFE economy standards are based on the size of the vehicle so manufacturers make them larger. In addition consumers correlate the cost of a vehicle with its physical size so it's easier to charge more for a larger vehicle. |
|
|
|
OH, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 10:20:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Millennial]
[#40]
My FIL had a early 2000's F150 FX4 and replaced it with a new Ford Ranger like ~2 years ago. The ranger is/was the same size. It's ridiculous. F150/1500s/etc now are as big as F350s 15 years ago.
I wish they still made normal size compact pickups. That's why I kind of want a Ford Maverick or a Jeep Renegade. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 10:28:43 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Neomonk21: Exactly. I heard somewhere that the new emission laws make it way more expensive to manufacture smaller trucks so they just made the trucks bigger to get around it. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Neomonk21: Originally Posted By Rudukai13: It’s because it’s cheaper for the manufacturers to make the trucks bigger than it is to make them more fuel efficient Exactly. I heard somewhere that the new emission laws make it way more expensive to manufacture smaller trucks so they just made the trucks bigger to get around it. yup. even works down to the SUV market. My US-spec Audi SQ5 sat over an inch higher than the EU/ROW versions do. supposedly that reason is so that it gets classified as a truck instead of a car for CAFE statistics
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 10:30:02 PM EDT
[#42]
I had a '97 Ranger STX Crew (? 1/2 cab) cab that was my second favorite vehicle out of the many that I've owned over the past 50+ years.
|
|
|
|
IL, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 10:43:55 PM EDT
[#43]
I had a 1985 V6 2.8 w 5 speed. Bench seat. It had a AT&T toolbed box completly enclosed. The area between the two side tool boxes was covered and you could lock it. It was a great truck and got about 25mpg. It was a carburated engine and ran great with a little lifter noise at idle.
It was comfortable to sit in also. I bought it for 700 bucks from a used car lot that bought at an AT&T action. He wanted 2500 but I saw he nedded 700 bucks in sales tax the next day or he was going to get a big penalty. Dont mark it on your calender and thumb tack the letter next to it where customers can see it. I currently have a 1995 standard cab standard wheel base. It sucks to sit in. More like on top off the seat instead of in it. I bought it for 200 bucks with a bad brake vaccum master cylinder and rear break cylinders. The parts where like 150 at most. It has the 2.3 auto. Its gutless but I bought it to LS swap it. That is if I can ghet a decent seat set up in it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 10:44:59 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By hbilly: Now do a 70's ford ranger dark brown with a bench seat that I can only describe as wicker pattern. I miss that truck. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 10:50:32 PM EDT
[#45]
Those old rangers were handy.
Inherited a 85 from my sister. New ones are a full size pick-up now. |
|
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 10:53:18 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By rock71: Those old 4.0s were as fast through the 1/4 as a stock Mustang. I had the 5 speed. It was surprisingly quick. Leaked oil like a sieve though and ate through rear main seals. Interior bits were cheap and broke very easily. I remember my parking brake completely froze up after driving through some slush. Just a poor quality truck. Mine went down the road with 60K miles. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 10:53:29 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Never_A_Wick: I had an ‘89 just like this but white. Had the 2.3. Great little truck. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/578900/IMG_5909_jpeg-3197939.JPG First truck was a 91 xlt extended cab with the HO4. I ran it into the ground for 298kmi. I regret that I scrapped it out when it finally got too tired to spend money on. Would've been a prime chassis for dropping an om602 into. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 10:54:35 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By hbilly: Now do a 70's ford ranger 8ft bed Big block engine he put in 10 and 1/14 in rear ends Heavy leaf springs packs |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 10:55:41 PM EDT
[#49]
I know nothing of trucks. But I assumed the point of the Ranger was to be a small truck. Someone who needs a truck bed for oversized or easy cleaning but still needs a smaller vehicle. That new Ranger looks like an average sized truck. I assume the F-150s are now much larger than that new Ranger?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2024 10:59:46 PM EDT
[#50]
The old Ranger was a compact pickup. The current Ranger is a midsize. F-150 is significantly larger:
|
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File
