Why doesn't ford or any other company make a small truck that gets good MPG...

My 2002 Ranger averages 20MPG.

Ford is bringing the Ranger back, but I fear it will only be in name. If you want to know what the new Ranger will be like just go check out an Explorer Sport Trac. It will be as big as F150's used to be.

>If you can't afford the gas in a 4cyl Taco or Colorado you don't need a truck.
hi
i drive a ranger, i like to minimize my fuel consumption
i do not tow, most my loads are light. i dont need to be hitting 85mph uphill when fully loaded
a light duty pickuptruck that can haul light loads is what me and others like me need.

during the summer using midgrade gas, i can get 30mpg hwy in my ranger

What you people need is a wagon. There's a special area of hell reserved for faggots who hypermile trucks.

In almost all trucks where you compare a V6 to the V8, there's like a 0-2mpg difference going to the V8, but that V8 will make the truck so much nicer doing anything at all.

If you want a "truck" that gets mpgs what you want is a Honda Ridgeline.

My 2009 ranger got 25 city/33 highway ¿

The Honda gets 0-2 mpg's more than the Silverado V8. And they wonder why they don't sell...

>What you people need is a wagon.
low clearance wont get me through a lot of cool places ive slept at night
cant scrap metal and deliver furniture with a wagon

seriously though if any vehicle should be hypermiled it should be big trucks becuase they consume the most fucking fuel, wow crazy huh?

18471485
ya but wagons have a roof greatly limiting what you can carry edge lord
>only owning 1 vehicle
lol

>seriously though if any vehicle should be hypermiled it should be big trucks becuase they consume the most fucking fuel, wow crazy huh?

No. Drive something else if you're too Jew to use a truck properly.

they do for the rest of the world you fat fucks need all that power and fuel to haul your fat ass bitchs around

1/2 ton trucks became the standard back in the early 90's. Small utility trucks are dead and will likely only see a rebirth in some faddish, useless design reboot.

also this

He literally mentioned he uses it properly. Then you call him a Jew for driving efficiently.

Arghh! WTF Kill it with FIRE. Cant unsee

Ford Ranger

On all levels except physical, the Twingo is a trucc.

>pushrod engine
>body-on-frame construction
>leafspring suspension
>live rear axle despite being FWD
>four wheel drum brakes
>carburated engine instead of EFI
>can haul more than a ford

It isn't sold in North America. And when it does become available, it won't be offered with the diesel, meaning it'll have some shitty underpowered gas engine.

Still not sure why we can't have nice things.

You can't fit a motorcycle in the back of a wagon.

baby-tier brakes that can barely stop itself, let alone a trailer

>going down hill
>need to stop
>just can't stop and end up dying in an out-of-control Twingo doing 150mph

just cut an access hole bro, what you want to be fucking spoonfed everything?

>ctrl-f
>no CAFE

My thoughts exactly, I don't know much about cars, but I swore disc brakes were stronger than drum.

The old mans Mitsi Triton gets 28mpg in the city with a 7700lb tow capacity and 360lb/ft but no idea if they're even available in the US.

Not exactly, trucks use drums because to get more from a disc you need to go bigger diameter, to get more from a drum you make them wider/thicker but they don't need to be any bigger diameter. Ultimately discs are more practical and easier to maintain and shit like trains use them because they can run large diameter rotors.

I'm working on my CDL-A right now, so I know the use of drums on bigger vehicles, but I mean for residential vehicles, I thought drum was just a cheaper way to manufacture.

Supposed to be shown off sometime this year, but it does seem fairly large compared to those old little things, though I think all vehicles have been enlarged due to regulations, mostly safety and such.

You think the brakes on an F350 can stop the 25,000 lbs trailer it is pulling if those trailer brakes failed?

Not sure if it's a price thing desu, average FIATs were 4 wheel disc in the 60's and they weren't expensive cars plus mechanically a disc brake is super simple.

because they have the same shitty aerodynamics as full sized trucks and still weigh 4000lbs. throw in a 4 cylinder and it's going to be working fairly hard under most conditions which means more fuel. throw in a bigger 6 cylinder and it's not going to work as hard but naturally uses more fuel. light trucks are just in that range where the fuel economy is going to be shit no matter what

no he's right. only a fucking retard would pay that much for a light truck when you can get a full sized truck for basically the same amount. you also get something far more capable and has pretty much the same fuel economy so again you'd have to be fucking retarded to buy a light truck and that's exactly why they died off

>This kills the reg cab pick up with a 6ft box.

At my job I have to call someone a nigger several times a day. And I'm calling you a liar.

...

>ranger
>4500lbs
please fucking hang yourself

>20 mpg city

an i4 colorado gets that, and if you're not towing or hauling shit an i4 is fine.

>Buying piece of shit Toyota with 300k miles for 20k
>Just broken in still got 5 gorillion miles of life left

the tundra is a full size and they still sell them...

>faggot hipster bike in a faggot hipster wagon
Fuck you

An F350 shouldn't be pulling 25K lbs

>Wagon
No.

>Van
Fell for the van over a truck meme and I can assure you a van isn't the solution.

I'm now the owner of a van I hardly use. Quickly found out loading and unloading vans isn't nearly as convenient as a truck. God forbid I have something filthy I want to transport.

The newest F350 is rated to pull 32,000 lbs.

That doesn't mean it's a good idea. That's a lot of weight to be dragging up and down a mountain pass.

Why shouldn't I enjoy what I can afford? Petrol is about two bucks a gallon and I enjoy comfort, interior room and the ability to haul milling machines, engines and motorcycles in my bed.

Crash protection had a fair amount to do with little truck weight increase. If want tiny truck restore an old Ranger. It's cheap enough and they are easy to work on. Been there, done that.

Rear drums permit easy and cheap parking brakes. Front drums are shit because they fade easily and their feel is shit because drums are "self-energizing". Discs shed heat far better and are gradually making their way to big rigs.

Drums do well with air brake systems so using them on big trucks makes sense.

Drums in their era were such shit that brake shops at the bottom of long mountain grades were common, as was brake shoe relining. Fuck drums except on the rear.

They can do it gradually but overgrossing by that much is asking the tail to wag the dog into a ditch. My bro towed a single wide using his 454 Chevy dually whose rear brakes were fucked, but he's insane and very (physically, not mentally) competent at driving. He also towed a 40 pax International bus with a C-30 wrecker by slightly unloading the front wheels so it would follow. I learned a lot but I won't use it unless it was life and death which ain't likely.

It's rated to pull 32,000lbs.

A bad idea would be pulling anything greater than what it's intended to pull. I'm guessing you haven't towed with a modern truck, as you'd personally know it's not like using your buddies 90s half ton with everything worn out.

first women ruin our lives
then they ruin our cars

:/ why can't we just have 400 horse power cheap ass production little trucks?

>can haul more than a ford
-Needs citation-

>Tfw drive a 92 silverado
>Tfw Colorado's are bigger than me

>can haul more than a ford
More than a 30 year old ford festiva? I wouldn't even believe that.

The ranger was 3000lbs

My 4 cylinder 1992 ranger weighs 2600 Pound.

I know, I've weighed it (at a garbage dump).

then get a ute.
its just a wagon with its roof cut off.

My dad's Mazda BT-50 (same as the Ford Ranger) gets 35mpg hwy. They exist, it's just that Americans won't buy a 4cyl manual transmission diesel truck.

This, my first two cars were a Mazda b-series (ford ranger), followed by a minivan. Take the seats out and the van usually wins when hauling cargo

Bullshit.

A 1993, 4 door Suzuki sidekick weighs 2,800 lbs and a 1994 V6 ford probe weighs 2,600 lbs. A 1996 Toyota Corolla weighs 2,400 lbs

>Drums in their era were such shit that brake shops at the bottom of long mountain grades were common, as was brake shoe relining

While this is true. Watching an old truck drop the anchors in an emergency stop I am always amazed at how fast they can actually stop with the amount of tonnage they carry.

you checked all those other cars but you didn't think to look up a ranger?
curb weight is 2820 lbs
could easily be 2600 lbs dry
edmunds.com/ford/ranger/1991/features-specs/?trim=S

I didn't check them. I had them previously and those were out of memory.

>curb weight is 2820 lbs
>could easily be 2600 lbs dry

So he weighed it without fluids?

>weighed at a garbage dump
>2600 dry

So he pulled all the fluids of his ranger to weigh it at a dump?

Also you bastards should know better, dump scales aren't used for that kind of accuracy. They check you for weight Delta. Weight in then weight out. Doesn't matter if they're a bit off because they just need the difference.

If you want to actually weigh your car, get a 4 corner scale and properly do it.
>Pic related, my old 1996 Accord after it was gutted and roll cage installed
>pre-automatic to manual conversion
>no driver

Why wouldn't it be sold with a diesel? GM and FCA trucks come with diesel options. All the other Ford trucks come with diesel options too.

minivans look horrendously gay though. wagons have similar cargo capacity and look far better.

frontier is still small, and the cheapest small truck available too.

>US Curb Weight: Weight of car with fluids and fuel at 100% as well as weight of any option expected to be in more than 33% of vehicles sold. Driver not included in US legal definition, but usually included in manufacturer's public figures.

...

>minivans look horrendously gay
Holy fuck, what is it with people? I get not dressing like a ballerina and putting lipstick, but come the fuck on, bae, start thinking about what suits your needs, instead of "what will Chad/mr. and mrs. Shekelstein think of me if I buy a cuckmobile?"

Shit, man, I see utility companies using tiny ass cargo vans all the damn time (Renault Cangoo, look it up) because it's cheap and makes sense for them, and the guys using them don't have issues hopping up in either that or an actual mid-size truck with a crane to get shit done

Honestly, the fuck you care if someone thinks it looks gay? It works for you, and if it ever comes to it, you'll be able to show that it serves it's purpose just fine

Also, wagons may not have the roof height that minivans/vans afford you (another actual point for pick ups, have to admit. When you need to move a 200 gallon water tank and don't have a dolly to shove it on, a pick up is about the only thing. Rare circumstance though)

>twingo
>pushrod
>leafspring
>four wheel drums
>carbed
>haul more than a truck
the fuck you on about?

My 02 Duramax silverado 2500HD gets around 18 calculated mpg which isnt bad for a 4x4 truck that can pretty much tow a yacht

So like what asked.

As far as I recall my gas tank was only about 1/4 full.
And I have no options whatsoever (roll up windows for example) so there's nothing there to give it extra weight.

And my exhaust pipe + manifold fell off when I was off-roading somewhere (2wd gets the job done surprisingly well) so I imagine that all adds up to the 150-200 pound differential.

I know it was 263? Pounds (when I minused my own weight of 130 lbs)
Don't remember the last digit but I remember the rest because I was surprised at how light it was.

passenger vans simply look gay as fuck, are sluggish, lack the utility unless you start ripping seats out, and generally lack mpgs. i dislike how most pickups look nowadays too as the styling looks as if they're attempting to mimic semi tractors. utility vans make you look like a contractor. would you really drive a utility van to a white collar office job? i'd love to have a utility/cargo van, but i don't want to start filling my driveway with cars that i may not even use once a week.

vanagon is about the only passenger van that comes to mind which i wouldn't mind owning based on styling.

What engine?

>when I minused my own weight of 130 lbs
>130lbs

Rough times huh buddy?

6.6 L Duramax LB7 Turbodiesel

>passenger vans simply look gay as fuck

>Be American
>Heard of a plumber who is supposed to be good and not too expensive
>Call him up and he says he will be around in the next half hour
>20 mins later some faggot in a van with plumbing decals pulls up
>Actually walks on my driveway and rings my bell
>I walk out with my gun and tell him to get his fairy ass out of my neighborhood or imma pop him
>Call my now ex-bro and say he isn't a part of our manly JO crystal club anymore because he uses a faggot plumber
>Call up the last guy who did a shitty job and overcharged me for all the time he couldnt find shit in his truck
>At least he has a truck and not a faggot van
>I hope no one in the neighborhood thinks I am gay because there was a van parked in front of my house for 5 mins because I swear I am straight and don't like men at all even in the slightest.

I don't eat much.
I'm 6 foot 3 if you can believe it.

Pic related.

What's the lowest mileage you have gotten? I am thinking of changing out trucks but the kind of work I do gives me about half the rated city mileage on any vehicle I have.

How do you get stuff in your pickup?

I only use the bed semi-occasionally, usually helping friends move furniture and that type of shit.
I can pick up my own weight (under extreme circumstances) but generally I can handle most things, if not exactly with ease.
I have back pain a lot not gonna lie.

I primarily got it for off-roading, and for reliability.
It currently has 256k on the clock, had 203k when I got it, and the only thing I've had to do is replace the Tires, get a new alternator, and oil changes.
All of which I've done myself.

I think the difference is looking like a low test boonga in an estima vs a high test tradesman (like me) in a 2017 hiace with decals, and ladders on the roof. Both are vans, both are completely different.

America must suck senpai. I’d probably get in order:
>Triton gls x, can do full time viscous awd and has lsds, 6 speed manual deisel with mivec vvt
>Amarok, just the shit does everything the best and super nice but 80 grand
>navara, has a pretty sick tt v6 deisel
>hilux, they are a bit fugly now
>Mazda bt50, it’s the same as the ranger (which is kinda shit) but it’s a bit ugly so people will pay 10k more for the ranger lol
>ranger, just a more expensive bt50 but it looks like an f150 raptor apparently so wew
>Isuzu dmax, Isuzu does nothing great now
>Holden Colorado, has a shit Cummins engine that shits itself

>Holden Colorado, has a shit Cummins engine that shits itself
>Holden
>Cummins

It has the same Isuzu diesel in it

>High Test
>Low Test

I thought men in America were the only ones with testosterone insecurities. Though it seems like men in Australia are capable of having low testosterone as well.

>passenger vans simply look gay as fuck
Literally why do you give a fuck? If it's good for what you intend to do with it, go for a minivan, for fuck's sake. This isn't high school anymore, goddamnit

Why do you care if some fuckwit gauges your worth/whatever by what you drive? It's a goddamn utility vehicle, it's not like you're gonna be driving a stanced volkswagen with kawaii animu grill vinyls on the side and a sticker that says "onii-chan my hips are moving on their own"

Sluggish? Depends on what you get on the pickup department, but sure enough, a van isn't the godmachine. And like I said, if it suits the purpose, it's a good option, as would be a pickup truck, if you need to carry, say, diesel jerry cans and hydraulic oil for backhoes/equipment since it's always spilling and never comes off

>would you really drive a utility van to a white collar office job?
Eh, depends on how far it is, fuel economy, running costs, how much of a hassle it is, etc. If I feel like it, I might get a Honduh S2000 to hektik to and from work, or maybe a C5 Corvette, or an old landboat. As with everything, it depends

>vanagon
Noice, but why not one of those soviet-era vans? Also, good enough for rossiyan backroads, good enough for anything else the world has to throw at it

Is the shitsu any gud in pickup form? As in double-cab short bed, Manuel tranny, with the 2.4? Asking because we never got them with the cool as fuck utility bodies/options and it's kind of an exotic option that could be interesting to look at

Also heard the Amarok is kinda meh on the engine department, mainly that it's finicky on fuel/will shit itself as soon as you casually think of low quality diesel, and the sensors can be wonky, ever heard of that over there? Ever heard of snapped crankshafts on the high-power Amaroks? Had a relative go through that with one (first model year, admittedly)

>bae
shut the fuck up nigger

Eh, calm your tits dr autismo, nobody spergs about that term anymore, except you it seems

I'd thank you for the (you), but that wasn't my intention, so instead I'll advise you to just go skree elsewhere, I'm just trying to make some people here understand that driving a van instead of a pickup isn't going to turn them into cock-gobblers, no matter how hard their neighbors lift their eyebrows at them

> minivans look gay as Fuck
YOU LOOK GAY AS FUCK

>underpowered gas engine
I'm no Ford fan, but I would be surprised if it didn't have a decently powered Egoboost engine.

Is this U.S. Mpg, or whatever crazy measurements your country uses?

They do, they have a badge on the side and I read about the issue they have. And I’m a kiwi, the only pics of tritons I could find were in Aus.

My dad actually has one and it’s the ute id get it’s pretty great. The only issue is the “hill start assist” that only works sometimes and often stalls the car