Ford Ranger

A Mazda bt50 4x2 would have the same specs a Ford Ranger for less money, Isuzu D Max 4x2 3liter hi rider would fit the bill also for less money and 6 year warranty. If largish cars can tow 1600kg vans or trailers that size vehicle should. You could try how your combination rides first before worrying about changing shock absorbers.

In my experience with a Ranger 4x4 the shocks are already too soft.

The 2.2 is a bit laggy but IIRC it has very similar final outputs to a 3.0 hilux so towing that sized trailer won’t be an issue.

G'day Chris
A 2.2 ltre will pull the caravan but a 3 litre will do it with less engine stresses being applied to it to make that amount of power. What tows your van or load is Torque not power. Torque = ability do work, power is the rate of doing that work. Of course there has to be both. For a smaller engine to make same torque or power output as a larger engine it has to be more stressed in it's mechanicals and fuel system. Have you noticed VW have gone away from their 2 litre in favour of a much larger engine?

What exactly constitutes a soft ride for you, A Cadillac or a normal car or ute? No one in their right mind would fit softer shocks to any std off road vehicle because they will simply not be able to control the vehicle mass, load mass and caravan, normal and suddenly imposed loads, presented as a moving dynamic mass. Most people want more control and handling ability, not less and a subsequent dangerous suspension action as well. The original when new, in most utes barely caters for ABS and Corrective ESC actions when asked to do so. When worn they become dangerous and not able to do their designed corrective actions. I changed my Dmax shocks at 5000km from new because they did not work as a shock absorber should. Tighter more control and shock ability made a huge difference.Softer and I would have crashed by now.

Hi chris a,

A couple of people here may have missed the fact that you are asking about a 4X2, and not a 4X4. That being said, the advice given is still valid. If you put softer shocks particularly in the back, any load you put in/on the back will see the back of the vehicle sag more. This may effect the handling of your vehicle as it may lift the front thus decreasing both your steering & braking ability.

Macca.

G'day Chris,
Just to clear things up a bit for you regarding Springs & Shockers.
The Springs carry the weight of the vehicle & depending on the weight carrying capacity of them you will get a harsher ride when rhe vehicle is unladen.
Shock absorbers control the rate the springs compress & rebound. They convert this energy to heat.
Changing Shockers will not alter the ride height as this is not their function.
Cheers
Stu.

Hi Chris

Your biggest worry will be ,the clutch wear if its a manual, When you say 1600 I imagine that's kgs,

unladen or loaded?...… Its a fair bit for a 4x2 when your on a steep hill in a line of traffic and have to stop and take off again, The early DMax had terribly light clutches in them, I actually helped a guy up Victoria pass NSW one time when his clutch was near on fire trying to take off on that hill with a not so large van in tow. most 4x2 diesels are the same in that department. Ive seen many stuffed by 60,000 ks from new!. that's from continuous carrying and towing maximum weight though.

Cheers Axle.

“Won’t be going off road” meaning? Remaining on bitumen roads? If so take your pick of any 2wd car that takes your fancy even common Holden Commodores or Falcons or similar that has the towing capacity.
If you mean many dirt roads then if it rains they become muddy roads and choose accordingly.

But I assume all bitumen roads. A mere couple of decades ago stock sedans were common tow cars but the trend is now imo bone rattling utes for reasons that escape me , for bitumen only towing around the ATM you’re talking about. A common falcon can tow up to 2300kg with a nice ride

Hi
Commonly accepted the larger engine 3.ltr early Ranger and the 3.2 ltr of later Ranger are far more competent at towing than the smaller 2.2 or 2.5 .
The 2 smaller engine will consume almost as much fuel if not more with a lot more gear changes towing the same weight. This has been the case since engines were invented . A smaller single turbo will work harder to achieve the same result as the larger.
Big fat torque band starting early in the RPM and lasting thru the mid range = less gear changes
Very late models are bit different .
No trucks use a very small engines .

Nobody wants the small engines anyways --think resale .
Looked at a VW V6 TD costly

You should check out Isuzu D Max 4x2 3L. That should fit your needs.

Dampers help control the rate at which the springs extend and compress, and stiffness/sag is mainly a matter of the spring rate. If you want the springs to compress more readily for that soft ride it'll also sag more and won't perform properly while towing.
At the rear a correctly designed leaf helper airbag that you air up when loaded and down when not, helps deal with the gap - but get this done by a suspension pro, not with a kit off ebay.

Why not look at LDV. Get a 4x4 with all the features, and low range when you want to manoeuvre the caravan into that tight spot or go down that gravel road to a free camp. We own 2 on the property been faultless and work hard.

I heard the Ranger autos had some major issues. Probably sorted by now but I suggest deep research before committing.