I've got a 2010 F-150 Supercrew that is the nicest truck I've ever owned. As much as I love it, my practical side doesn't like the size, fuel economy, and monthly payment.

As much as I'd love a cheap old beater truck for when I need to haul stuff and have a nice, economical daily driver car, it makes the most sense to have one vehicle that is perhaps a compromise in some aspects. I was thinking a 4 cylinder Ranger Supercab might be the ticket. My hobby has me carrying around bicycles regularly, I own a home, and I own a motorcycle. I don't think I'd be happy owning a car and having to borrow a truck when I need it.

My biggest concerns with getting a Ranger is the power and interior space. I know it isn't going to be fast, but wanted to hear what folks think of the 2.3 paired with the 5 speed auto. These trucks seem pretty light, so I was curious how these scoot around.

I am also a taller guy at 6'1". I recently drove a 2010 or 2011 Ranger Supercab while my truck was getting work done at the dealer. I never spent more than 20-30 minutes in it, so I wasn't able to come away with a impression of it's comfort.

Does anybody think I'll kick myself if I downsized to the Ranger?

 

While I didn't downsize, I updraded from a '91 Ranger, standard cab, to an '08 Ranger extended cab. I like the room in the cab, if, for no other reason, I can move the driver's seat back further and don't have my head up against the back window.

As you can see by my signature, my truck has the 2.3 Duratec with the 5 speed auto tranny. I have better performance than I had with the "91"s 2.3 Lima engine. I am very satisfied with the performance that engine and tranny give. Its not set up for heavy hauling, lthough.

What I didn't think of it until I used the truck for a while is that I should have gotten the 4 door extended cab instaed of the 2 door. The 2 door configuration is a pain to put things in and get them out over the seats or center armrest. Even sliding the passenger seat forward and folding the seatback forward doesn't do much to help rear area loading. With the 4 door, it would be much easier to open the door and slide things in and out of the back area.

Oh well, next time.

 

my first ranger was a '88 supercab 2wd with the 2.3 / 5speed manual got good milage, not alot of power for pulling or hills, but did the job. traded it in '98 for a '92 3/4 ton chevrolet reg cab 2wd with the 350/ creeper 1st 5 speed manual, really pulled well, would do anything you asked of it, but 90% of the time i was driving it to work @ 12-14 mpg. i got rid of the 3/4 ton for a montana van for the wife, it had more gremins then that '80's movie of the same name, found my '93 ranger and traded for it, its the ohv 4.0, supercab 4x4 with the 5 speed manual, electric shift transfer case. its milage isnt as good as the 4 cyl was but its acceptable. will get 19 hwy and will still do whatever i need to do as far as a truck , but i can afford to drive it on a daily basis. i love having a supercab again, and even though i had gone years with a 2wd and no real problems in snow, one bad winter with a 4wd will make you never want to be without one.

 

Went from an '88 F-150 Super Cab to a '00 Ranger regular cab. Haven't looked back!!

 

If you're thinking of getting a new Ranger, then you had better hurry. They're going completely out of production in a few months. No more new Rangers after that!

 

I just up sized to a supercrew F150 4X4 but I still have the ranger for now. There is only a 4 mpg difference between the two. I was surprised

 

That 4 mpg difference is actually quite large when viewed as a percentage (25-30%). I figure it would save me about $50 a month (currently spending around $200 on gas). That alone isn't worth me dumping the F-150, but I know insurance will be a little cheaper and I expect my monthly payment would be $150 less.

I'd really like to be able to replace my truck with a little car that got 30 mpg, but I don't think I'd be happy driving a car. The Ranger seems like a nice, simple vehicle. I know I will miss some of the niceties of the F-150, but its way overkill for my 6 mile round trip commute and running around town on the weekends. Its a pain to park and load stuff into the tall bed.

 

I know what you mean..I first down sized from my super cab f150 to a focus...yeah wasent cutting it. I'm no car guy either even though it was getting 35mpg. So I sold the focus and bought a ranger have had the ranger for about 8 months now and I was missing the room..so I bought the screw. I couldent fit my 2 small kids in the reg. Cab ranger and I hate taking the wifes car everywhere. I'll just deal with the gas mileage.

 

I have both - an F-150 4x4 and a Ranger 4x4. I couldn't afford to drive my old F-150 back & forth to work anymore (it's 34-years old and has a *slightly* modified engine lol) so, I bought the Ranger (it gets better mileage than the F-150 - even with the A/C running lol.)

My Ranger has the 4.0L SOHC - Haven't tried towing anything with it yet but, for the really heavy stuff, I still have the ol' green machine... The bed walls aren't as high on the Ranger, but I've found that I can haul the same stuff to the dump as I could in F-150 - as long as I can still do my job, that's good enough for me...

 

.
My insurance dropped about $20-$25 a month when I went from a Ranger to a F150. The insurance company said its because the F150 has a better crash rating then the Ranger. This is about 5 years ago though

 

I'll go back a ways for you. I had an '87 ranger 1.9? 5sp reg cab, 30+ mpg,
had kids, went to a '87 4wd 2.8 auto extended ranger, 24mpg
kids got bigger, went to a 94 f-150 excab 5.0. 17mpg. Great comfort roomy, Iliked it.
kids got older and thier own cars, I thought I would trade down and get fuel mileage... Wrong! 2000 ranger excab 4wd 4.0.auto.....17mpg. So much for american technology advancement. It just turned 100k, #4 cyl eats coolant, tranny slips in 2nd, front and rear diffs leak, and more than 50% of the bolts break when trying to remove them. How does an oil pan rust out???? Not rusted out on my '29 chevy, or '67 pontiac, or '71 pontiac, or any other make car. Just went back to full size, Comfort, quiet, roomy..2001 GMC excab 4.8 auto 4wd 30k miles, 20mpg. The ranger is for sale

 

If you can shift for your self a 2.3L Duratech four in a Ranger with 4x2 and 5speed will do 30mpg on the highway and 24 in town.

 

I can drive a manual, but my wife can't (physical limitation, not that she couldn't learn). I traded a manual transmission car in on my F-150 because driving it was hurting my left leg due to the repetitive motion operating the clutch. I am a bit hesitant to buy another manual vehicle that would be my DD.

I went and test drove a new 2011 Ranger XLT Supercab with the 2.3 and 5 speed auto. The power and acceleration was about what I expected. That auto has a really tall first gear which is unfortunate because it takes it forever to get moving. The rest of the gears are closely spaced, so once you get it spooled up, it pulls well. I know the manual would offer better performance, but it just isn't an option.

My biggest disappointment was with the handling. While the truck is small and easy to maneuver, the handling was a bit concerning. It understeers really badly, more than the 2010 4.0 XLT Supercab I drove a few months ago from what I recall. That could be my imagination because I also have upgraded the shocks on my F-150 and it stays a lot flatter in corners. The front end on the Ranger pushes a lot when you make a right-hander at an intersection. I'd be a bit concerned with how it acts in the rain, though it does have traction/stability control to help with that.

That being said, it is a small truck which probably has a greater forward weight bias than the f-150. Trucks are not known for their handling, so I can't knock it too much. I still like my truck enough more that I don't want to get rid of it, so I don't think the Ranger is going to be right for me right now. I really wanted to like it. They are cool little trucks. Thanks all for your replies.