lots of employees at the ranger plant here in St. paul, MN are glad they have a job for another 2 years.

 

I was looking under the hood of a 2005 F-350 with a 6.0l. The belt routing sticker on the core support had the 5.4, 6.0 diesel, v-10, and this 4.4 diesel. Ooo la la.

 

lol the vans i work on are 08 e350s and they got the same sticker ... also has another one "not for sale in states with california emissions standards"

anyways back to the thread ... think about the small truck market today

froniters - too expensive
tacos - too expensive
colorados - do any of those 5cyls get over 20 mpg?
dakotas - same v8 thats in the ram 1500, and the 3.7l v6 that was offered in em didnt get over 20mpg either

rangers 4cyls are bomb for gas miles and they are often cheaper than many other trucks.

 

I got interested in the Ranger, because a friend of mine had one, a 2000, that had worked very well for him. He's got about 130,000 miles on it and it still looks very good. One of his friends has a Ranger with 160,000 and still going strong. They seem to be a very dependable vehicle, with decent mileage. When they do need something fixed, it's usually a fairly easy job, with reasonable expense as well. So considering the fact that I could expect to get good service for a mileage range of 130,000+, when I found my Ranger with 31,500 miles on it, I figured I could get many years of service out of my truck. So I bought it right away.

I'm only putting on between 4-5,000 miles a year, so I should be good for many years.

 

Dont forget that Ford will be using the new 3.5L v-6 once they make the global change over in the Ranger...least that is the way it seems. the 4.0L I6 in aussie land is going the way of the dinosaur for the "global" v-6 (3.5L) at the end of the 2009 MY so i suspect Ford to do the same for the Ranger as they are using it now on the Lincoln MKZ and MKX.