Decisions, decisions... F150 or Ranger

Both trucks seem to have good crash ratings. It depends on what you collided with. Colliding with other vehicles, the heavier vehicle (F150) would be safer (in general people, let not argue about rollovers and such). Colliding with an immovable object makes little difference. I saw a tractor trailer rig collide with an apparently pretty strong steel electic pole. The pole didn't budge and the tractor was demolished.

The next question is if you will need to tow anything or have a need for a larger bed. For me, I'm sticking with my 4 Cyl Ranger. I don't tow, the bed is large enough for my needs and I get 27 mpg and once got 34 on a hiway trip. Very nice when gas is 3.50 a gallon here (freaking insane). John

Hey John,

I should have mentioned that I dont tow anything and use my truck for the typical use of the average driver...hauling purchases, moving every now and then etc. My wrecked Ranger got great gas mileage and Im hoping whatever I get will be ok by comparision. Safety features are a huge concern to me. When I had my accident, I hit a Toyota 4 Runner and Im pretty sure I totaled it as well. I figure if Im in another Ranger, Ill be at least as safe as I was in the 2000 model and if Im in a 150, I might even fare better. Its fun to have to make this decision though. :-)

The four cylinder may give that kind of mileage, but the 4.0 L V6 sure doesn't.

I just bought a new, Ranger FX4 Level II. I like it so far and the fact that it can tow light trailers, but the fuel mileage is not any better than the F-350 Powerstroke monster that I traded in.

I had a 4.0 L 4x4 '98 and I got between 15 and 20 mpg. The 3.0L is not much better. The 4 Cyl has 5 less HP yet far better fuel economy than the 3.0L The 3.0L does not make any sense these days. John

What is that mileage? My father drives an 06 F250 FX4 Lariat and gets

10mpg. I drive a 98 ranger w/ a 3.0L 6 that gets 20ish. Granted, his truck is twice the size. I'm curious how your new truck is doing for mileage.

I've got a 98 3.0 4x4 ranger that gets 20ish. If I spend a lot of time in 4x4 & city I can get in the teens, but commuting I'm in the low 20's.

While it's only got 5 more HP, HP is not always a big factor buying a truck. For the daily driver that hauls some groceries HP may play a decent factor, but for traditional "truck" uses (i.e. hauling a heavy load in the bed, towing, 4x4ing, etc) torque is the number to look at.

You'll notice the 3.0 has 26 more lb-ft of torque, which is just over

17% of the 4cyl's overall torque. That's a difference you can feel, and a big deal with a full load or heavy trailer when coming into a hill.

The 4cyl's HP also comes in later than the 3.0, requiring you to rev the engine more to get that HP for passing & accelerating. Many drivers, especially truck drivers like the power on demand lower in the RPM's. The 3.0 delivers that package far better than the 4cyl.

If you REALLY need a truck, the F150 is the better choice. If you just want the features of a truck -- ability to haul stuff once in a while -- the Ranger is probably the way to go. I also need a truck -- I'm currently out of a '95 Bronco -- and the F150 or F250 is my target. The Ranger is no better for me than the Bronco.

So far the Ranger is getting around 17 overall. The F350 was a diesel (6.0L) and it got about 17 overall as well.

I suspect your father's F250 is probably the V10 gasser. My son had one and also got about 10 mpg.

Eisboch

Thanks for the reply. My dads truck is actually a V8 gasser, but it's a 4 door w/ the lariet package (which I hear adds a bit of weight), a tool box, tools & lumber, etc. It's never empty, it's definatly a work truck. I imagine the truck would get better mileage as an office commuter, but probably not too much better.