Ford vs The Competition Technical discussion and comparison ONLY. Trolls will not be tolerated.

Mid-sized Ford truck?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #31  
Old 08-12-2004, 12:08 AM
Frost13's Avatar
Frost13
Frost13 is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Nowhere, SE OK
Posts: 1,209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Dodge doesn't put the 318's and 360's in the Dakota's anymore. They put in the 4.7 V8 and a V6. I'll bet you anything that in the next couple of years they make a Dakota with a HEMI.
 
  #32  
Old 08-12-2004, 06:06 PM
Delta's Avatar
Delta
Delta is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Central IN
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Budly
Why even bother with mid sized pickups?
The reasons are numerous.

Easier to maneuver, park, etc.

Easier to load and unload. I can reach over the sides to get anything that might be in the back of my small pickup but have to crawl into a big pickup to reach everything.

Fits into my small garage. I can't fit an extended cab (which I prefer) full size pickup into my garage. I would have to move the mirrors in every time I parked a full size pickup in my garage.

Easier to wash. I save ~1.5 hours washing and waxing my Ranger.

Harder to get stuck and easier to get unstuck.

Way better gas mileage. My 79 F100 got 13 mpg on the highway. I get 25+ with my Ranger. I spend a lot less time at the gas station.

Cheaper maintenance. Less oil, coolant, smaller tires, etc.

I have used my Ranger exclusively for my business for the past 8 years and I don't miss the big one.
 
  #33  
Old 08-12-2004, 06:42 PM
WXboy's Avatar
WXboy
WXboy is offline
Cargo Master
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Central KY
Posts: 3,372
Received 352 Likes on 213 Posts
The Tacoma can tow more than the Ranger?? Since when can you get a Taco equipped to tow 5,600 lbs?? I agree with you on the front suspension. Torsion bars suck. But other than that the Taco has NOTHING over on the Ranger. The sheetmetal of the Toyota is thinner, the frame is weaker, the axels are smaller, their largest engine is still 20 HP shy of the Ford, they don't have nearly as many options, the extended cab doesn't have 4-doors, and they are more expensive. The Toyota is a nice truck, but it's certainly not superior to the Ranger.

I think a "mid-size" truck is a waste actually. The mid-size trucks that are on the road now are in full-size truck price range, so it makes them pointless.
 
  #34  
Old 08-16-2004, 01:11 PM
Budly's Avatar
Budly
Budly is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: KYLE
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Delta
The reasons are numerous.

Easier to maneuver, park, etc.

Easier to load and unload. I can reach over the sides to get anything that might be in the back of my small pickup but have to crawl into a big pickup to reach everything.

Fits into my small garage. I can't fit an extended cab (which I prefer) full size pickup into my garage. I would have to move the mirrors in every time I parked a full size pickup in my garage.

Easier to wash. I save ~1.5 hours washing and waxing my Ranger.

Harder to get stuck and easier to get unstuck.

Way better gas mileage. My 79 F100 got 13 mpg on the highway. I get 25+ with my Ranger. I spend a lot less time at the gas station.

Cheaper maintenance. Less oil, coolant, smaller tires, etc.

I have used my Ranger exclusively for my business for the past 8 years and I don't miss the big one.


easier to manuver? not in a real world difference.

I am 6'6 so i guess the loading and unloading parts dont apply to me

The garage part doesnt apply to me either becuz i keep my classies in the garage

easier to wash? nah i just go to a car wash

Harder to get stuck? i have seen many a ranger/S-10 stuck before and only once have i ever gotten any of my fullies stuck and it was only becuz i missed a gear when i was boggin.

not hardly any better mileage either, i can get 22 w/ a 1500 318 if i drive good and dont have to worry about topping out at 45 MPH into a head wind

cheaper maintennance? pocket change among all other things.

I owned a ranger one time, and NEVER again, gutless, small, weak bodied, and dont get good enough gas mileage difference to justify buying one. IMO
 
  #35  
Old 08-17-2004, 09:14 AM
jimandmandy's Avatar
jimandmandy
jimandmandy is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Running Springs CA
Posts: 5,228
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
We will not get small diesels until 2006 or 2007 when they get the sulfur out of our diesel fuel. Right now, only heavy duty (over 8500 GVW) diesels are allowed here. This is emmissions driven.

Jim
 
  #36  
Old 08-17-2004, 07:35 PM
chaseface84's Avatar
chaseface84
chaseface84 is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Flagstaff, AZ
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
thats only california and 4 other states who dont allow the diesels in smaller vehicles
 
  #37  
Old 08-19-2004, 05:03 PM
dspencer's Avatar
dspencer
dspencer is offline
Senior User
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
jimandmandy you are right. When they reformulate we will see all majors with diesels in their 1/2 tons and maybe the compact trucks. By the way if it matters, the big trucks are doing the same thing. The epa future guidelines are keeping all the engine manufacturers jumping designing new cleaner engines.
The only thing that could dampen the smaller diesels in smaller trucks are future epa requirements that would be hard to achieve.
 
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
DCP
General NON-Automotive Conversation
20
03-17-2023 07:05 AM
hillcountryflt
General Automotive Discussion
20
01-30-2015 04:45 AM
jbabbler
Ford vs The Competition
28
03-15-2006 05:09 AM
JRRKAR
Ford vs The Competition
31
03-12-2006 01:21 PM
RamsayX
General Automotive Discussion
7
12-20-2005 04:10 PM



Quick Reply: Mid-sized Ford truck?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:14 PM.