05ontheway, thanks a ton for your initial impressions. I was getting a bit pessimistic, wasn't I? I was (and still am, I guess) thinking about getting a Ranger with the 7' bed as my plan B. Funny thing is, the 2WD 2005 F150 with its 4.2 gets 15/20 miles per gallon, while the 4X4 4.0 V-6 Ranger gets 16/19. Maybe not a fair comparison, since the Ranger carrying around the extra weight of 4 wheel drive, but mileage is a non issue between the two.

I remember my dad's old Ford Van had that 300 straight six. That thing had low end torque! I was always spinning the wheels unintentially.

 

Scott XLT, I don't have any personal experience with Rangers, or for that matter import size trucks in general, I've only ever owned full sized pickups. You see a lot of Rangers on the road, so either they can't be all bad, or a lot of people hve made a mistake (thats possible too). If you need a 4 wheel drive and wan't reasonable gas mileage the Ranger is an option, or you can go the route I did and put a limited slip differential in, in my case a 3.73 LS. Can't tell you what I think of it yet, no bad roads to deal with, but my hope and expectations are that the LS will impove winter driving, we'll see. Have fun shopping.

 

So you have your "05 already? Or are you talkin about a different truck? IF so how much was that to buy and have the differential installed?

 

Well after scoping out a couple of 05 regular cab shortbed pics on the web, I think the F150 will be my clear choice. (probably an XL or STX) Now I need to talk to my Ford Dealer about when Ford will make the 05 Manual trans available. Could be well into 2005. Mid-Summer? That would be a bummer.

05ontheway: I would be interested in any pics you would have to post, as all the 2005 reg cab short beds I've seen have been 4X4s. I'm sure the lower stance of the 4X2 gives it a distinctive appearance. FYI, my first truck was an early eighties Datsun/Nissan with a gutless 4-banger. (Great mileage though.) I've always thought that the compact pickups are a convenient way to provide oneself with hauling capabilities while still fitting in ones garage. My 2001 supercab fit in my garage with about two inches to spare. The 2005s are long enough to not fit at all, therefore, unless I relegate my next truck off limits to my garage, it will have to be a short bed. That's OK, with a canopy it may kind of resemble an old school full size Bronco.

 

homer4.2 and Scot XLT, I got the '05 three days ago, haven't had time to take photos of it, should have this afternoon (Sunday) but never thought of it till it was dark. I'll try to get a gallery up before long. The LS differential was an option on the truck a bit under $300. Cost: Taxes/Title/Destination Charges and out the door @ $22,509.75 however there was a $2000 rebate and had I not titled it as a business vehicle I could have had an X Plan and that would have taken another $500 off, so with $2000 down, I financed $18,509. Well spent money, every penny, I love this truck more every day, I guess the honeymoon is officially on! Other comments, I bought the short box speciffically for garaging issues, my garage is only 19 feet deep and a standard bed is truly a squeeze. Also I don't know how much difference in height there is between my 2 wheel drive and the 4X version of the same. I can tell a significant difference between climbing into it and my '93 XLT. I've had a couple people mistake it for a 4X. My dealership had no STX's and had to get this one in trade from a dealership an hour away, I had not even seen a 2X STX till the driver pulled in with it, I was there when he pulled in, I thought they'd made a mistake and brought me a 4X. Sorry, I get wordy sometimes.

 

hey guys,

I'm more used to posting in the FE forums with my old '67 F100, but i bought an '05 F-150 a few days ago, with the 4.2 and auto, and i like it. I mean, it doesn't make monster power or anything, but it's not a total slouch. I've been driving a 3.0L Ranger for the past year, which i traded on this truck, and it seems to me that this one has a lot more go. I know a lot of folks don't particularly like the 3.0, so you might not want to use it for a comparison.. all i know is it gets up to 50 mph on a road i travel every day faster than the ranger, and is only a bit slower about it than my dad's '99 GMC Sierra with 5.3L/auto.. again, a lot of folks don't like that drivetrain either, but this particular one scoots along right nice.. I'm not going to even bother comparing it to the 390 i have in the '67... you can draw your own conclusions.. best thing i can really say though, is either find a buddy that'll let you take it for a spin, or just to test one out at the dealer.. it's all about individual perception, i imagine.

Ladd

 

laddmantx - Thanks for posting your impressions and comparisons! It is very valuable to me. Did you get the 3.73 rear end option (3.55 is standard, I think)? I would be interested in the gas mileage you experience as time goes on. I agree with your statement about how individual perception is very important. When I had my 5.4L 2001 f150 4wd SuperCab, I was dissapointed with the get up and go, probably because I had high expectations for the power of that engine. If I keep my expectations reasonable, it sounds like I will be pleased with the 4.2.

 

You both should just get the 2004 5.4L.. THAT PUPPY HAULS!!!

 

*runs out to the truck to grab window sticker, so as to avoid lying*

allrighty then.. looks like i have the 3.55 axle, and the 4-spd w/od trans. So far, i've been getting about 15-18 mpg with it, but i'll admit that i have a heavy foot and i drive a lot of backroads.. i imagine my highway percentage is probably 60. If i drive it real nice, it seems to get somewhere between 18-20.. but i haven't done much of that yet.