Why do some many people on Veeky Forums like the ranger?

Why do some many people on Veeky Forums like the ranger?

I will confidently say its one of the worse trucks ever built. Anemic engines, poor build quality, shit comfort. The RC has about the same room as miata. Everything thing about it is shitty. There are no redeeming qualities. Anything you can put in the back in bed of ranger you can easily fit in a station wagon or van. I don't see anyway you can defend this truck. I rather drive almost any other car post 1990, besides the S10, which is also shit.

damn son where did the bad ranger touch you

Agreed.
In my area they are super overpriced too.
It's a meme truck for sure.
Toyota and Mazda (pre 93) did it better.

Enjoy your shitvic OP

It's good on gas, has a little bed for little stuff, and can get you to point a to point b... I dont see what there is to hate?

They're popular because they're cheap and disposable. It's supposed to be a beater truck for light construction work and nothing more

I had a ranger, I don't see why everyone acts like they are amazing, bad fuel economy, unreliable, im from canada and they rot out really bad,

it was a good looking truck but that was about it

i was sstill sad when i rolled it but i have a sunfire now which i like 100 times better

A vehicle is a vehicle... if you're not a picky needy bitch you can find the good in all automobiles

You buy a Ranger when you don't want to pay the Toyota tax.

>anemic engines
true, but they last forever
>poor build quality
who cares? it's a work truck, not a luxury car.
>uncomfortable
not really. pretty comfy
>anything you can put in the bed of the ranger could fit in a van or wagon
12ft lumber? no.
mulch? no.
large awkwardly shaped items? no.

even captcha is on my side.

Lol, the only truck of the time with more power than a ranger with the 4.0 is the s10 with the 4.3 that cost way more. Calling it anemic is kind of stupid, considering at the time Toyota's were still using a 4 banger...

Dirt cheap, will survive on nothing but gas and oil.
The core supports commonly rust out, but they'll keep going for 250k+ no problem

Except that the Toyotas had an optional 3.4 V6

Ford always made great trucks. I'm sorry you're retarded.

Because they were damned near invincible? I've seen Rangers that were considered "totaled" by accident reports that were still driveable.

They were't very comfy yes, but no truck from the 90's really was. Even "luxury" trucks weren't. They were easy to buy, fix, and maintain because everything was simplified.

There's a reason Ford is bringing them back.

Oh yes, the 3.4 that was infamous for it's constant head gasket failures, so much so that a truck with a 3.0 or 3.4 is worth. less than a 4 cylinder model. 3v-ze is called the "3.slow" where I'm from.

3.4 didnt have HG issues
Just the 3.0 which is easily fixed

Shit daily drivers
Great work trucks that'll last forever

If you want a mid-sized pickup as a daily driver, newer Tacomas, Canyons, and Colorados are significantly better. If you want max comfy, Ford F-150 higher trims are some of the most comfortable vehicles to ride in daily.

I'm talking about the 5vz, the 3.4, not the 3.0

>3 months ago
>looking for truck in the area
>fucking rangers everywhere

>ranger
>comfy

Manlet detected

Two words.

Danger ranger

...

My cousin is 6'8" and has no problem fitting in even the tiny 80s regular cab rangers. Btw truck seats are meant to ride in a sitting position, not leaning, nigger.

I've been trying to tell Veeky Forums this for years
They are complete shit.
Ford is garbage.
baby trucks are all pretty bad desu, aside from the taco.

I'm 6'3" and I find them pretty comfy, even the regular cabs. Never had an issue with build quality, nothing rattles or squeaks in the interior and the mechanicals of the truck are solid.

My dad has a 3.0 ranger and I think it gets about 11mpg city driving, while making about 110hp at the wheels. Terrible daily driver, but works well for hauling stuff around.

you guys are no different then miatafags

The extended cabs are ok, but the RCs are shit for leg room.

plus if you have a passenger you have don't have place for any small luggage that you wouldn't want to put in the bed

Underrated

Luggage is an issue but I seriously have no leg issues, and I'm disproportionately long legged. My seat is all the way back, but it works.

I would only get a 4x4 ranger manual to swap the engine for a 302 out of an expolar and turn it into a good truck with power.

>putting a 302 into a ranger
Enjoy literally never not spinning the rear wheels

>There are no redeeming qualities.

they're cheap used and reasonably reliable

if you need a beater to haul shit around in, what more could you want?

>optional 3.4 V6

And the option 4.0 in the ranger is stronger, your point?

S10s are better, most jap stuff is better. Most of the people recommending it haven't driven enough to compare, but bear in mind this board is sponsored by Ford™ and that might explain things.

>while making about 110hp at the wheels

Yeah no, my 2001 ranger with a 3.0 doesnt loose 40 HP between the engine and wheels...

its probably more like 120-125 at the wheels.

Rangers are exponentially better than tacomas or frontiers, the s10 is better though.

But yeah tacomas are actually the worst "truck" I've ever seen. The only people who want them are oblivious homeowners who want to spend $11I on an 04 4 cylinder 4 ft bed pickup and justify their purchase by using it to go to the recycling center.

>baiting this hard
Wew lad