High-Perfrormance Ranger?
Senior User
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
From: Michigan
I can't see a souped-up factory Ranger being a big hit... It would be really cool and all, but I don't see the majority of the market getting too hyped over it. Sure, I'd love my Ranger to be able to hold its own in a race and all, but its main functions are to get me to work and back (with relatively good fuel economy!) and to move random things around. I assume a lot of owners like to move couches, Christmas trees, etc. as well, so a sport-tuned truck would be a waste of time/money in that situation. My $0.02...
I'd LOVE to turbo my Ranger, however...
Sadly, mandatory maintainence comes first...
I'd LOVE to turbo my Ranger, however...
Sadly, mandatory maintainence comes first...
Posting Guru
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,006
Likes: 0
From: Coastal North Carolina
i know the feeling. Every time i get ready to do something to it, something else breaks. I just spent ~$500 on maintenance and repairs. That would have been new exhaust, tonneau cover or something. Dont think i could have rigged up a turbo for that, but i could have spent it alot of other ways than how i did. Still mad about the whole situation, but thats another post.
Elder User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 952
Likes: 0
From: Charlotte, NC
if nothing else they oughta do it up like chevy's extreme, that was big with us youngins, just soup it up a little more so it could do like the lightning. basically have a lightning extreme ranger, not only would it hold its own, it would appeal to a large crowd. but has anyone else heard the rumor of ford dropping the 5.0 in the ranger or has that rumor stopped circulating?
New User
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Wasn't the "splash" fairly popular? I'd love to see Ford do a competitve model to Chevy's new rod truck. Maybe something with styling reminisant of the 53-56 f-100's, or maybe a 40's look, with enough power to impress..they use Corvette power, Ford could use Mustang or T-bird power.
Elder User
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 660
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Mike W
I think the 5.0 in anything is dead. I still call it a 302. 
Actually, the current Ranger V6 is at about 200HP, and a good motor, so I think a V8 Ranger isn't really needed, except it would be fun.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalytic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
Elder User
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 660
Likes: 0
Ah yes, but my 85 Mustang, equiped with a built, carbed 302, with 3:55's and 5 speed, gets 25mpg. I can say that a V6 Ranger won't accelerate about as as good, either! The 289 and/or 302 is about a 200 hp motor in stock trim, but a built one will make a Ranger (or a Mustang) really get up and go. With the right parts the 289 in your 65 will crank out well in excess of 300HP. The Ranger V6 won't do that without a turbo or something.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
mrka.davidson
2.6, 2.8, 2.9, 4.0 & SOHC 4.0 V6
8
May 22, 2015 09:05 PM
re5pect
1983 - 2012 Ranger & B-Series
6
Oct 6, 2003 08:43 PM
