related linksRead more passenger-car related articles
MORE ON MSN AUTOS
MORE ON MSN
MSN AUTOS VIDEO
Nov 12, 2010 3:17PM
The Ranger was extensively updated for the 1998 model year (new suspension and interior) and the engines were updated in 2001 The current 2.3 liter is not a Ford engine and is in fact the same as the engine (slightly detuned) in the 2003-2008 Mazda6 and 2005-2009 Mazda3and the 2006-2009 Fusion. It has nothing to do with the Pinto 2.3 which went out of production in 2004 or but since you brought it up my current 1991 Ranger has 200,000 miles and the one I bought new in 1991 went 340,000 miles before I stupidly sold it in 2001. Not bad at all (the Pinto 2.3 had an extensive redesign in 1984 and an even more thorough one in 1989 and is indeed one of the best motors ever sold in terms of reliability and durability). It does suck that there will no longer be a Ranger available but even the current one is a capable truck that will last for years and years if maintained.
Nov 15, 2010 8:23AM
When will REAL automotive writers be employed by this website? I'm so tired of their distorted lies and slandering of good vehicles! The Ford Ranger is a darned good pickup and in today's world of Queen Mary-sized full size pickups, the Ranger is a needed asset. The Lincoln Town Car is built on the Panther chassis, and yes although it is not the latest technology, it is arguably one of the most durable, long-lasting chassis on the road. Look at the number of Ford Crown Vic's in police duty, mostly because of their long-term durability and reliability. There is also nothing wrong with the Chrysler PT Cruiser. It is a niche vehicle and looks different than 99% of the cars on the road. We don't ALL want look-alike Toyota Camry's or Honda Accords and its time you "automotive" writers learn that.
Nov 13, 2010 1:10PM
This article is useless. The 2.3L engine in the Ranger is bulletproof and should not be compared to the Pinto. I have worked for a Ford dealer for many years and have seen tons of the 2.3 engines with over 200K on them. I know someone that has over 400K on that engine. Although the overall architecture of the truck is dated, they are well built and durable. Not to mention, easy to work on. The only real competition is the Tacoma which has similar off road prowess. No other compact truck has it or can be modified the way a Ranger can. If you want to pick on a Ford, blast the Windstar all day long. A better candidate for the lame pickup award would be the anemic Colorado and Canyon by GM.
Nov 15, 2010 5:31AM
I think you should look at the Ford Ranger again before you slam it in your articles... We are a Ford family and own two mustangs, two rangers and a tarus... The Ranger is an affordable truck for us lower middleclass hard working consumers... it is reliable and gets decent gas mileage... Does the writer of this article own a Ranger? How can you slam it if you haven't owned one... This vehicle is apparently a great one or Ford wouldn't be selling so many of them...The Ford Ranger is purchased for fleet trucks by major utility companies and many cities across these United States have purchased them because they are dependable and last along time... MSN needs to put more effort into researching and less into slamming vehicles that they apparently no nothing about...
Nov 13, 2010 8:51AM
I actually have to agree with Ranger91. The short article on the Ford Ranger did not represent one of MSN's more informed pieces. What is more, everyone keeps going on and on about technological advances. Let's not forget, these advances also raise the prices of vehicles considerably. In this depressed economy, $20,000 is a lot of money to shell out. Also, the cost of upkeep has increased dramatically over the years. The days of a man being able to service his own vehicle in his garage or back yard with parts from a pick-and-pull or obtained inexpensively from a dealer are virtually gone. Dealer-based service departments charge an arm and a leg, and the local service shop often doesn't have the necessary diagnostic equipment, tools, or experience to sevice some o the newer, more advanced vehicles. And what mental midget thought E85 fuel was a good idea. This concoction isn't helping anyone's mileage or maintenance costs either. I'm tired of having to tear apart small engine carburetors to clean out the mess left behind because of this fuel. And by the way, I am now stationed in Bahrain where the average cost for gasoline (91 octane) is 88 cents per gallon. I was recently in Qatar where the average price was 40 cents. The government taxes on top of what we pay per barrel is ridiculous. I'm not sure that advanced technology is always the way to go. The ranger was and is a fairly simple vehicle to own and maintain. And not everyone needs a full-size pickup. I hate when people start beating up on a brand or model based on unfounded, personal whims.
Nov 17, 2010 10:01AM
I normally enjoy reading these articles, but I admit you guys lost alot of cred when you gave the Ford Ranger a less-than-shining crititque. My mom owned a Bright Canyon Red 1987 Ford Ranger and she put over 200,000 miles on it, and it still ran like it was new when she sold it because she was getting a little too old for a manual transmission. I own a Ford ranger with almost 190,000 on the ticker and it, too runs like a champ. They fill a much needed gap in the truck world. I have never had a single issue from my Ranger that was not to expected from regular use. They last forever if you keep basic maintenance on them. I hope Ford reconsiders and keeps them around, I would certainly buy another one. Furthermore, given the nature of the vehicle, it doesn't need a whole slew of tech thrown at it. It what it is and it is able to serve its purpose well. With the Ford Ranger, it's never been necessary to reinvent the wheel.
Nov 24, 2010 8:57AM
I have owned 7 Rangers used in my glass business. We don't get rid of them until at least 250,000 miles. Spend a little money for regular maintenance and they last nearly forever. I'm glad Ford hasn't screwed with it because improving on this truck would certainly be difficult. I LOVE OUR RANGERS!! I'll be interested to see what Ford has in store as a replacement. This will be a difficult act to follow. Whoever wrote this article should actually talk to Ranger owners.
Nov 16, 2010 4:23PM
Where do they get off calling the ford ranger a turkey obviuosly this guys information level is way low, ford rangers are dang good trucks,i own one, so i know at least what i am talking about.Methinks the guy wrote this article is the real turkey, and he shouldnt try and write about eaglesLOL
Nov 12, 2010 3:22PM
The frame was replaced in the Town Car in 2003 and the body was all new in 1998 so it is hardly related to the 1980 model (the current 4.6 liter V8 debuted in 1999 in the Mustang GT and in the Panther platform in 2002), even if some dimensions are basically the same.
Nov 24, 2010 11:45AM
The only turkey in this article is the writer. Maybe the writers at MSN should check their facts before writing articles. Ranger91 is 100% correct about the 4 cyl. Ranger. They stopped putting the 2.3 "Pinto" engine in these trucks, years ago. Actually truth been told,it was a great engine that was very durable,that saw life in industrial applications as a power unit in wood chippers,generators,etc. MSN writers need to stop writing "top 10 worst" articles about cars. I am tired of the articles slamming American cars.
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?