Ford Ranger Reliability

Agree on the auto gbc. Not sure I get your point on why the XLS was introduced as it's still available as a manual, if that were the case they could have done an auto only. My friends have ordered auto's as for towing I agree 100%.

XLS is manual only spec. Great in between spec level, no auto option.

According to Mr Ford auto is an option on the XLS Spec.
"3.2L TDCi Diesel
6-speed Manual Transmission (with optional 6-speed Automatic Transmission) (at extra cost)"

Yes Auto is available the guys just ordered 2 x XLS automatics with some other options.

We bought 2 xl autos in October specifically because the XLS was a manual only option and the xlt was not what we want in a work ute. Maybe all our jumping up and down got them to listen? The auto xl doesn't have a diff lock option which is also pretty near sighted - hence the want for XLS auto. If they are doing them now in auto I'd reckon they will be a volume seller for them.

gbc........here is the original Ford Ranger brochure. Auto transmission for the the XLT model has been an option from the beginning.Ford Ranger Brochure

Lyn w3 I think you'd better read the brochure. The XLS isn't even in it. The XLS was only introduced to the market mid last year when we were looking, and I can guarantee you that at the time they were manual only. I understand it is now available in auto, and that is a great thing, but it is also a very recent thing.

absolutely NOTHING wrong with the manual onroad, offroad and towing. I have one for 2 years and would NEVER EVER go with an auto. If you know how to drive a manual correctly you shouldn't have issues.

Ross do you actually have any real experience with the rangers or is it all hearsay as usual.
Bushy

Bushy
Do you have any experience with the auto industry and know of things which happen but don't experience every one personally?

If those items haven't happened , how did they then come to be and also have to be repaired in order to drive on?
Being aware of something is better than being unsuspecting and not know of any problems with a vehicle make.
Some just don't like to hear reality.

When everyone believes the same delusion then there is no problem, until something goes wrong. To be forewarned is an advantage.

No paranoia is needed though, just a balance in the issue.

A friend, n excellent mechanic works for the local Ford dealer.

You would be surprised to hear what goes on.

I have been directly involved in issues with 4 of the above faults.

Sorry to disappoint you.

G/Day Ross, The oil pump set up would make me very nervous ,evidently there has been engine problems because of this issue, but maybe not many, compared to the number sold.?


Cheers Axle.

It may become more of an issue in the future as the model comes out of warranty and more owners decide to do their own oil changes and not be aware of the self priming issues. Anecdotal evidence suggests you have a max of 10mins to get the new oil in and engine started for it to self prime. This could be an issue as the vehicle ages.

I have a ranger since August last year and recently 15000km service done and was informed the exact info Ross M as provided you about the oil situation. Iwas also informed that the oil filter isn't replaced until new oil is placed in the engine.

G'day Ross

If you dont mind, would you be able to post up ALL the problems people are having with other new vehicles so we can have a comparison with them to ALL the problems the new Rangers are having !

Would make very interseting reading !!


All the best

Gazz

fitzie
Who ever gave you the "don't touch the filter until it is full of oil is certainly clued up on the matter.
I believe, haven't tried it, when changing oil, you can start and instantly stop the engine the moment it fires so new oil is drawn into the pump and only a slight amount of old is expelled from the filter into the engine. Then change the filter. It ensures cooler, viscous oil is in the pump so minimize the possibility of it happening.

Outback Gazz
I probably don't know all the faults/problems and Ford isn't going to tell you either. They have had some problems some other makes don't seem to have experienced.
Remember, if it didn't happen no one would know of it at all.

G'day Ross

My point is - All new cars have problems - you just seem to single out the new Ranger !

Either back up your claims with hard proof - post all the problems other vehicles are having for comparison or don't post anything !


All the best

Gazz

Outback Gazz
The original poster asked about "Ford Ranger Reliability" I didn't single out Ford rangers at all. Just answered what Ford already knows of and also the people it has happened to also know.

Why would I include Mercedes info, or Colorado info, when FORD RANGER is what was specified.

We all know most vehicles have problems, but what has that got to do with it?
Why should we post comparisons? What will/does that prove.
OP didn't ask for them, it is only you who are demanding proof of anything mentioned.
Are you fearful of learning more and being more aware?

If you don't believe what people post, that is ok with me, don't believe it. The people who have had problems with any brand of vehicle certainly do believe it, 'cos it happened to their vehicle.

Just as a test, go to a Ford dealer and ask for a print out of all recorded faults with Rangers, which have been logged by Ford.
There may not be any. Many dealers initially deny knowledge of known fault, despite having received a tech bulletin about it from Ford. Other companies do the same.

Hi Gazz

The original question was re the reliability of the Ford Ranger, not other vehicles.

Ross has given information re the Ranger as requested.

Sounds fair to me.

People can make their own judgement as to what weight they give to his opinion.

It is of interest to me.

Regards
Rowdy

Not all new cars have problems..or at least not to the same extent.

Just about every company that sold a dodgy product comes out with the line that other manufacturers have the same record....they don't.

Ford in particular are famous for not fixing long running problems.

Falcons ALL had weak door handles....model after model, had the same problem..Ford never did anything about it...but you could easily buy an aftermarket door handle that did not break.
Most taxi managers of the era had a pair of door handles in their bottom draw.

Ford bucket seats have always been weak...their seat adjusters have always broken.

The ford straight six had an issue with the pressure relief valve in the oil pump, from day one....they made that pump the same way for decades and did not fix the problem.....the after market pumps had addressed the problem.

Stuff just breaks on fords....it happens because it is designed that way.

Frankly I would not buy another thing with a FORD badge on it..its like a curse.
Go the mazda.

cheers

Just to add some perspective.
I have owned 6 fords, 4 mazdas, 1 mitsubishi and 3 toyotas.
And driven plenty more.

I'll never buy another ford.

cheers

Sorry Guys

I did post about the reliabilty of my Ranger earlier in this thread didn't I !

Ross - What model Ranger do you own and how long have you had it ?

And Ross - just as a test why don't you go to any Toyota dealer and ask for a printed record of all recorded faults with Landcruisers - and then post that info here !!

I have no reason to argue with anybody on this great site but there seems to be a lot of negative crap put on any vehicle that is not a Toyota !

For the record - I own and run an outback 4wd tour company and only just 2 years ago was paid by Toyota Japan to film advertisements for the new Landcruiser ( current model ) and let me tell you after travelling 7000 odd kilometres in three weeks I would not buy one if my life depended on it !!

Rowdy - Ross gave information on "re: the Ranger as requested " but without hard and photocopied facts it's just hearsay !


I don't know guys - maybe I'm getting old and grumpy but I have owned and driven nearly every 4wd on the market and I can honestly say that the new Ranger is one of the best available at the moment !

All the best guys - just relax, don't stress and hope your footy team wins on the weekend !

Happy and safe travelling

Cheers

Gazz

Fords decades long history of issues is certainly not hearsay....it has been documented in the courts and the recall notices.

Their biggest pay out in recent times revolves around them simply not selecting an adequate tyre for the vehicle.

They are also credited by many as making THE worst vehicle of all time...and naming it after a family member.

A lepoard simply does not change its spots.

Then there is fords parts pricing polocy.....for years there have been plenty of people buying parts for their paralell model fords from Mazda, because it was cheaper...and the parts where stocked.

far from putting negatives on anything but Toyotas...not one single post to that effect on this thread.

BTW you would not get me into a current model landcruiser with a drag chain.

Fact is the ranger and the BT50 are not idetical, and one thing Ford have a long histrory of having problems with is trim and fitout....which I think you will find is the difference between the BT50 and the Ranger.

I also find it interesting that people "testify" about reliability of their vehicles when they own them for less than 100 000 Km.

Am I anti ford...damn straight.

cheers

Gazz,
Ross is correct in what he says although I will qualify it.

Ford are changing out the radiator hoses at service time due to rubbing on other hoses. They have one now with protection on it.

The batteries were a bad batch out of Thailand Land.

Have not come across the crank angle sensor or the linkage on the auto, so can't comment. I have no reason to doubt Ross though. I belief Ross is just pointing out current faults and that is what was asked by the OP.

Just a few auto boxes have failed and I don't know the reason for that. One thing I do know is some can give them a flogging and do all the wrong things to them, especially when towing.

You only have to read forums to see what some of the boy racers are up to in shortening a vehicles life.

As for Mister negative in the post above. I would just let it go in one ear and out the other at super sonic speed. Some live in the past and bring up things that happened 30 years ago. Like cruiser transfer to gearbox seals and transfer idler shafts. It took them 30 years to fix those problems and maybe he should he should look at the fines on the same manufacturer in the united states, regarding them hiding problems with a vehicle. Am I anti Cruiser or Toyota, definitely not.

All the best.

What many view of the worst case of the "ford mentaility"...the explorer/firestone case does not date to 30 years ago.....but it is an issue that continued and developed over a 10 year period.
A brief summary.
Ford knowing they had a stability problem with the "Bronco" and expecting a bad consumer report to that effect changed the name to "Exlorer"...This issue was identified in development in the late eighties.....they failed to properly manage the issue inspite of knowing exactly how to solve them.
The issue did not come to a head till 2001

It is clamed that there were 700 injuries and 203 deaths due to "product failures" related the the Ford Explorer.

An issue that is refeered to as "bad business ethics".

It was not untill 2002 that the stability issues in the explorer where resolved.

That is only a single and well publicised issue.


There is a very good reason whay all the American auto manufacturers are in decline...that is because they simply can not match the asian manufacturers for quaity attention to detal and respect for the customer.

cheers

Bantam,
Focus, OP asked about the reliability of the new ranger, by your own admission you won't drive a ford ranger or even a ford, so that means you have no input into the reliability of the new Ranger what so ever. That is unless you have a mates, mate of a mate who test drove one.

Ross M posted his knowledge on the subject with info gleaned from his background in the motor vehicle industry, and pointed out a few common faults. This is what the OP asked for.

As for the BT50 and Ranger not being identical. I could tell that by looking at them. They do look different.

The difference is Ranger was engineered in Australia and has Australian designed suspension. Ranger has extra strengthening of a cross member as well. They both share identical parts sourced from Thailand, and from what I understand all Australian Rangers are imported from Thailand and not SA or Brazil.

It is also recognised as the worlds safest ute.

Time will tell on reliability down the track, but so far they are standing up well. It is said they haven't clocked up the K's yet, but if you look at their mine they use, they have well and truly been tried out.

Bantam.....guess you won't be buying a Toyota also as they were just fined $1,2 Billion dollars for hiding safety faults.


Toyota Safety settlement

Did the toyota case involve injuring 700 and killing 203 from defects in a single vehice model.

BTW this thread is not about Toyota or any other manufacturer.

This is about Ford who have a long term reputation for making vhicles that little bits fall off and break or having made so many things that just don't work properly.

The clasic ford inability to make a door handle...interiour or exteriour that does not last like other manufacturers dois a constant over decades and the whle range of models.


While a lot of other manufacturers have has problems from time to time.

Ford just have problem after problem.

"Ford facing class action law suit over Ford My Ford Touch problems"

Likewise they are facing class action law suits concering cliaming higher than achieveble fuel economy out of a couple of its hybreds.

The well known issue with steering instability in their Luisville trucks


Mr Weir’s 2002 Ford Explorer has been returned to him in the wake of tests ordered after his vehicle’s cruise control apparently locked him into a 100km/h, 54-kilometre white-knuckle ride from Blackburn to Frankston on December 15.




ford-dodges-recall-for-16-million-vehicles-promises-to-extend-warranties.

The rear seatback latch fitted to affected vehicles may not engage correctly. This may result in the rear seatback latch not being secured to the body striker.

The driver may experience the inability to 'set' or 'activate' cruise control, or to 'cancel' or 'de-activate' cruise control when it is engaged.

and time after tme the faults and recalls are for things that are well proven and pretty straight forward items.
In this day and age why should anybody have a problem with a seat belt latch not working.

Ya just don't have to look far to find problem after problem with ford vehicles.

Sorry ford have done their dash with me.


As for being "engineered in australia...sorry hardly a recomendation and a throw away line the both ford and holden have used for decades.


As for the worlds safest ute......the americans are fixated in claimimg stuff is the best whatever...and then justifying it in their own terms or arranging for someone else to make the claim for them.

One thing for sure a loyal ford owner will never admit that their vehicle could be in any way inferiour.

Oh the funniest ford thing is the jeremy Clarkson experience with his GT40.

So ford sell a $1/4million dollar car to one of the worlds most high profile & vocal motoring identities...you'd think they would make an effort to make sure it worked.

"I then did something the man at Ford wasn’t expecting. I asked for my money back.

And that, the next day, is what happened.

They put £126,000 in my account and sent a man to pick up the car. “Is it the alarm system?” he said. “They all do that.” "

Ford simply cant be trusted to get anything right....history proves this.

cheers

Bantam,
PX Ranger reliability was asked of no the history of the Ford motor company.

If you have a look at most of your posts everything is negative.

Fords are crap. Won't own latest Landcruiser ute. Trailer manufacturers make crap. Ford didn't claim the PX as the worlds safest ute. Others did.
Australian designed is crud. You also seem to have a dislike for anything American.

If others would like to research posts by you, they will find umpteen in the very, very, very negative.

The cows have stopped milking and the hens won't lay. Hound dog howlin', he's so folorn.
Laziest dog that ever was born.
He's howlin' 'cause he's a-sittin' on a thorn —
Just too tired to move over. life gets Tee-Jus don't it.

Car door handles. 30 years ago.
Explorer deaths 25 years ago and caused by tyres not the vehicle itself.
Jeremy Clarkson. Well others can decide about him.
Worlds safest ute. This is decided by independant such as Euro ncap and Australian Ancap.
Toyota had a wee bit of a problem with cruise control. (But I still like Toyotas).

On the brighter side, go to a community that have some of the worst roads in Australia and see how many falcon station wagons there are, and yes they can by other vehicle makes just as cheaply.

Now back to reliability. Ross did report on problems with a coolant hose rubbing through on other hoses which is correct and is being addressed. The one about the hose rubbing through on the fan belt would be incorrect, as the serpentine belt is nowhere near the radiator hoses.

Now Bantam, go out and smell the roses before they die.

Car door handles....mate the XF suffered from it they where still making them as a ute in 93...I had one the door handles broke.....that is 20 years ago not 30.

don't start about the EA......back when I drove cabs we had a bloke who drove the first EA in the fleet...they had to pay him extra to drive it...it was off the road so much.

As for the explorer deaths.....2002 is not 25 years ago....that is when they fixed the problem.
Read the detail.....its all on line in detail from a number of sources including the court rulings......the explorer had problems with stability...FORD...not specifying an adequate tyre just made the situation much worse....remember 700 injured and 203 dead..and that is only the ones that came to court.

Some people go thru life and don't want to believe bad stuff happens...then when it does they call it a freak accident....when in reality it was a pretty clear probability.

We have been making cars for quite a long time now.....why should any vehicle suffer from a coolant hose rubbing thru on anything.......come on seriously

When ya door handles fall off, or the adjuster for the seat recline breaks or the glove box wont stay shut ....remember me...I told Ye.

cheers

how about a few other random ford comments

Had a 2005 Ghia before the SZ and that was great too, had a few minor problems but all fixed under warranty.

Had a 2007 Ghia that we traded in 3 months ago. Drove well for a big unit, had a great auto transmission, but build quality was typical Ford/Holden. Stuff rattled, even when new, body panel fit inconsistent, carpets weren't exactly the right size – usual stuff

A summary of most Ford arguments.

yes – well maybe, but you'd be very likely to find yourself in the fanboy camp too. There's not really a lot of members who feel strongly enough to post a negative post because they get howled down by the fanboys

i well remember when the rust issue under the seals of the rear door became apparent in the Terrys, the head honcho of the ford forum was very under whelmed to find his pet Ghia was also a victim. And then there was the guy who snapped a pic of the Ghia at the sydney motorshow where he'd pulled back the rubber to show that this example too had inbuilt rust free of charge

only thing i can offer is to read the dedicated forums because you'll find more posts about particular issues but in the process you'll likely have to wade thru a myriad of fanboy posts who find excuses/reasons/blah blah to excuse the generally poor quality that plagues most fords


HMM yeh ya don't have to look far.

So to the ranger.
After waiting for five months I recently took delivery of a new Ford Ranger. It was delivered to my home and the deliveryman assured me that everything was ok with it. That evening I took it for a drive and noticed that there was a vibration through the drivetrain. Initially I thought it might have been a tyre or wheel out of balance, but this did not fix the problem so I contacted my dealership and booked it in. So far they have swapped tyres and wheels, checked out the differential, removed the tail-shaft and checked it for balance. Now they are talking about pulling the automatic transmission apart to attempt to find the problem. I am currently in contact with Ford Customer Care and they have stated that their policy is to repair the vehicle, which doesn't sit well with me, as this is a brand new car that I paid for in full and the Ford technicians cannot find the problem as yet. Can you please help as this is my business work ute and I am unable to perform my duties to the full until these matters are resolved. Am I entitled to a replacement vehicle? Ford hasn't offered me a courtesy vehicle so I am considering going to fair-trading over this matter.

Engine is dusted and turbo blown.. Sand has bypassed air filter and completely dusted the engine, have been told not covered under warranty and will cost me $26,000.. Blaming it on my after-market bullbar not being Australian standard with is a joke as it has nothing to do with the air filter! I have since received Australian standard approval on the bullbar from the manufacturer and ford has change the fault to excessive sand in the air filter which is my fault voiding warranty! I have been to the beach twice for a day trip each! Even if I have been smashing through sand dunes (like the new ford ranger ads show they do) no matte how much sand, dust, feeds seed, or any other material is in the air filter it should never bypass the filter.. A warning light or setting should tell me there is a problem or the engine should lag and decrease in power, yet none of this has happened.. I don't know how ford can be so arrogant about this being my fault when it is clearly a fault with thee air filter and intake design.. I will never in a million years buy or recommend buying a ford or even from a ford dealer! They will not honor their new car warranty not even when it is clearly a warranty job!


Serioulsy, ya don't have to look far google it up...but watch out for the "fanboys

cheers

Bantam,
For all the happy people driving Rangers and BT50's you have just made their world implode.

There is one person on a forum who has just about broken every part of his Ranger. When you analyse what has happened, it is not hard to see how much he has flogged the vehicle.

Now what I do suggest, is you could start writing a book on the problems of a PX Ranger by using google as your source, or you could ask New Idea to give you a bit of help in the art of investigative journalism.

You should be able to cover everything from your anti everything armchair.

If you contact the mining companies that are having little trouble with their rangers, I am sure they will listen intently.

Have a great negative day sunshine.

G'day Guys

Just came back from a weeks trip - had a couple ExploreOz members in the group who pointed out to me that I was a bit over the top with some of my replies here - and whilst they know I get annoyed at a few things on this great site they seem to think I have taken my frustrations out on one person in particular !

So to you Ross M - I sincerely apologise for taking my frustrations out on you - nothing personal !

I just get very annoyed that there are so many people on this site that bag every vehicle that is not a Toyota. I have mentioned before in some of my posts that sometimes this site should be called - ExploreOzbutOnlyifyourareinaToyota !

Anyway - it's good that we are all different and don't drive the same cars and barrack for the same footy team !

The mighty and reliable Ranger kicked butt once again on the trip and showed the big Nissans and Toyotas up again ( could be driver ability too )

Cheers Ross and others and thanks for listening !

Gazz

Nice one Gazz thanks

Nice to drive, pulls a load well, handles well etc etc etc etc etc doesn't change the reality of the faults which have occurred with the Rangers.
Lots of people love them.

You might do 100,000km with no problems.
The poor bloke who last all his water from the aircon chewing the hose at 15,000 or less isn't going to listen to you about reliability.

Other might have a perfect run, Great, some may not, there is a % who do not.

Self accolades don't mean a thing if YOURS is the one which fails.

So no one is deluded as to it being a perfect vehicle in every way, we answer what was asked.
If the OP doesn't want to realize and accept the even some of the known issues ten that is OK. As mentioned, it is to be forewarned which is better.
Then you know what to do about it and know it is an issue and what can be done. If no knowledge of the issues then you ARE OUT IN THE COLD and floundering and having to learn it all under stress while trying to get it going again.

It is your choice. I have a bucket of sand if you wish to bury your head in it. That works in a similar way.

If you only wish to hear positive things about a vehicle then don't ask about it's reliability or you may get instances where failures have occurred. Oh, shock horror.

Anyone who hasn't done 150,000km or 200,000km in one can't really say it was reliable. If they do, then that one is proven it's reliability.

46,000km trouble free, WOW. That is impressive, to some.

G'day Ross

Ok mate - I will take my head out of the sand and heed your advice !

What vehicle should I buy then - it must be new, less than 48k, have a factory diff lock as standard, 6 airbags, traction control, hill descent, adaptive load control, trailer sway assist, 6 speed auto, drive like a car not a truck, get 850 plus k's out of a standard tank when cruising, 700 plus k's around town, effortlessly pull my 2.5 tonne trailer, be a spacecab with opening rear doors, have 4wd ability to easily go where Patrols, Cruisers and Hilux's with 4 inch lifts 35 inch muddies with diff locks struggled as my $hitbox Ranger in standard form easily went where the abovementioned vehicles were struggling on my last trip thru the High Country !

Or maybe you know where I can get a brand new GQ Patrol traytop -as my trusty old GQ is about to clock over 900,000 k's on the original untouched motor !

The Ranger has only just been out for 3 years so how would you expect someone to do 200,000 k's in one ?

I look forward to your reply on what vehicle it is I need to buy to suit my needs because I will trade in my piece of crap Ranger and get one !


All the best


Gazz

I never said not to buy one at any time.
If the specs suit you buy one, buy two, one for shopping.

Why are you now calling your Ranger a "$hitbox Ranger"?

I didn't say they were.
I didn't mention Toyota/s either.
You mentioned both in a negative way.

There you go again calling it a crap Ranger. Your words, not mine.

It was you who asked for comparisons and I gave you a way of finding out. I don't require comparisons.

You suggested I try Toyota for all faults. WHY?
How does that help anyone and certainly doesn't assist the OP in determining the reliability of a Ranger.

I only pointed out what faults had happened to some of them. and not all faults either.
All supplied as requested. Even the OP changed his tune and didn't want to know about faults, but began by asking about reliability. Strange that.

The 200,000km EXAMPLE was exactly that, a 200,000km example. Perhaps you missed that context.

I fully endorse your vehicle choice and it will never break down. How does that sound? condescending and untruthful? Patronizing perhaps.

Just not reality. If that's what you want to hear I will wear Rose coloured Glasses when posting for some delicate recipients.

What is that saying! "You can't handle the truth".

If a person initially asks for the pro's and con's and all issues included, then they will possibly get that. That will send some into a spin.

G'day Ross

"Why are you now calling your Ranger a "$hitbox Ranger"?"Well I guess if you re read your posts you will realise that you have in a way bagged them so with you being the most knowledgeable person on this great site I would assume my Ranger is a $hitbox then !

Obviously you cannot supply details of a better vehicle so you just twist your words around to suit you !

In my reply to the OP I gave my view on my cars reliability as did other people who own one - do you own one ?

Could you please point out where the OP "changed his tune" and didn't want to know about faults - can't see that wording anywhere - or is that just twisting things around again ?

No need for you to wear rose coloured glasses because I don't give a rats about what others think or say about my vehicles or anything else I own for that matter and as far as handling the truth - fancy saying something stupid like that without actually knowing the person - I can guarrantee I can handle the truth and a lot of other things much better than you can Ross !

And should I be broken down in the desert somewhere on one of my trips in my unreliable Ranger and you should happen to drive past - please feel free to drive on by and I will happily give you a wave !


Cheers

Gazz

Over and Out !

Your replies are, as expected.

Oh, nearly forgot, the OP replied, "Nice one Gazz thanks", when you again told him what he wanted to hear, and it didn't include reliability..
That is different to asking for is in heading, Ford Ranger Reliability.

Woody,
I hope you aren't using the fuel flow on the dash to get fuel usage readings, that readout is very inaccurate.

If you are taking the readings from the amount of fuel you put in the tank, verses the distance travelled. then you should apply to ford for a job as a tester. Those figures are way below fords advertised usage for the 3.2 PX ranger.

Ah let the mockers commence......

Actually I have found the fuel usage readings on the dash computer to be quite accurate......it is the Distance to Empty reading that is all over the place and is only accurate if your driving style and conditions remain constant.

I monitor fuel consumption very closely and keep a log book and receipts for every fill. Driving style is the biggest contributer to fuel consumption and the 2nd biggest is fitting things that affect the aerodynamics of the car such as roof racks, bullbars and lift kits.

I will let you do the math on this one but my fuel receipt shows 64.86L used over a distance of 947km. For that particular tank it was a late night run from Bundaberg to Toowoomba and back down the inland highway where there are few hills. I always fill the tank to the rim of the filler for consistency.
Distance has also been confirmed for accuracy by comparing the odometer with my GPS. The speedometer however is 4% out.

The Ranger was only 3 weeks old then and I still did not have the tonneau cover fitted and so expected it was possible to do better than that once it was fitted. Since then the lowest I have had is 7L/100km but usually with a few runs around town it sits between 7.5-7.9.
With my tandem trailer fully loaded with 4 x drums of fuel the fuel consumption has gone as high as 10.5L/100km which included 75% highway and 25% crawling slowly through a 4wd track on our property.
My 80 and 100 series diesel landcruisers would have been around 15-16L/100km in this same situation.

I for one don't take a lot of notice of the advertised usage figures produced by manufacturers as I have found these to be way out in both directions for different vehicles.

Have fun!

They are certainly impressive fuel figures BW.

No, not a mocker or a knocker, just a factor. I own one and those figures are the best I have ever seen, like I said you can get better fuel consumption than ford can.

Most of the flow meters that I have come across and yes I have driven a few Rangers, the readings are at least 1l/h out and read on the low side.

Even Isuzu, which is the most economical of the utes can't get your figures.

Based on this page.......DMAX Maxrun Challenge
It seems that their 4x2 version has been able to return around 4.5L/100km so around 7-8 is more than achievable out of many of the modern diesels. There are many factors such as headwinds/tailwinds etc that can influence this significantly but it certainly is achievable if you use the right foot sparingly.

BW
To get good figures you would have to be driving slow like the Dmax Challenge did. They also did a few things to the ute which all normal users wouldn't do.

If yours is a Slow Ranger then it would also be a Long Ranger.

Yep, the figures for the fuel challenge D-max while excellent is an entirely different kettle of fish to a normal road going vehicle.

Well! No time to chat as I have to turn a mile tonight, I have to go and burn some diesel at a rate of around 1litre per 2 kilometres and that is with a light foot.

If you are getting those fuel consumption figures, just keep on keeping on. You are on a winner.

Yep that's true guys although I don't drive that slow.

I noted in my original post the speedo is out by 4% so with cruise control set on 100, the real speed is about 96.
I have noticed if I bump it up to just over the 100 mark the consumption goes up to about 8.4L/100km so it varies quite a bit.

Slow one, my other ute is a 4x4 '77 F100 with a warm 351 V8 which the last time I went to the farm used 40L/100km on LPG, and this is no longer the cheap fuel it used to be at $1.20/L in these parts. Not quite 1L per 2km but getting close....Ha!!

Most of the time those offering a long warranty term do so because they feel the need to give their potential customers..."piece of mind".

cheers

Sorry,
not ome suspension but oem suspension. Edit, edit, edit button would be nice.