Ford Ranger 3.2 TD

Submitted: Saturday, Jul 14, 2012 at 12:43
ThreadID: 96867 Views:20255 Replies:6 FollowUps:7
This Thread has been Archived
Hi, we are inquiring if anyone has driven the new ford ranger 3.2 lt Turbo auto,
and towing a van, we are trying to get some evaluation on power,towing ability
and fuel consumption, thanks.

Jan & Peter
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: member - mazcan - Saturday, Jul 14, 2012 at 13:14

Saturday, Jul 14, 2012 at 13:14
hi jan & peter
there was a thread on here recently stating that a gear box on one of the new rangers had failed while towing a van below its towable weight on a trip from nsw's to darwin and the box was replaced under warranty
dont know if the poster ever came back with the cause but the dealers are usuallly reluctant to reveal what causes these events and keep it in house so to speak
but in fairness every brand has their failures
this may be of interest
there's a new vw amarok about to be releashed with an 8 speed auto and 132kw diesel and 470nm i recall are the figures
ive also been told that the navara 550 diesel with auto is a guttsy tow vehicle
AnswerID: 490925

Reply By: Member - colin M- Saturday, Jul 14, 2012 at 13:30

Saturday, Jul 14, 2012 at 13:30
Can only talk about the 2007 Ranger auto 3Litre I have had since new and now finished 140000 trouble free KMs. Fuel around town 16litres / 100 km. Towing 17ft Millard all round the paddock last year averaged 17l/100km. No problems with towing and also previously had a 4.85 Trailcraft and a Tray top camper on same vehicle with no problem. When towing I do oil changes every 5000km instead of the log book 10000km.
Had air bags fiited and then rear springs beefed up in Cairns 3 years ago when had the tray top as it was a bit heavy.

Couple of months ago fitted a DP Chip, gives me a bit more power on the hills but hasn't improved the L/Km that I can measure, probably an expensive toy.

About to head off soon on a longer trip and next May doing the round the paddock thing again including Gibb River rd and Mitchell plateau when we will leave van at Kununurra and tent it for a few weeks.

Bloke who did my RWC a couple of weeks ago told me the manual Rangers had some clutch and gearbox problems but he had not seen any with the auto.

Hope this is some use.

AnswerID: 490926

Follow Up By: Patrol22 - Saturday, Jul 14, 2012 at 14:16

Saturday, Jul 14, 2012 at 14:16
Colin....those are similar figures I get from my auto 2.5 D40 Navara when towing. When not towing I get around the 12.5 on the highway and 13 around town. Did a double crossing of Australia E-W via the Nullabor and then W-E through the deserts....not towing on this trip but the ute was fully loaded and I averaged 14 l/100km for the round trip. Believe it or not the highest consumptions was 18 l/100km travelling into a headwind on the Nullabor. I was thinking that my consumption was a bit high but seems it is on a par with the Ranger (quite like the Ranger too just got a better deal at the time I bought from Nissan). My D40 has a heap of "extras" that add weight....full set of 3mm steel underbody bash plates, steel bullbar and winch, steel side steps, 160 ltr long range tank, 70 ltr water tank, 2 x 110 ah aux batteries and a storage unit. Also has a canopy and roof when all things are considered I really can't complain about the fuel consumption.
FollowupID: 766310

Follow Up By: Thinkin - Saturday, Jul 14, 2012 at 14:34

Saturday, Jul 14, 2012 at 14:34
They did ask about a new 3.2 litre ranger.

2007 model would be no comparison, totally different vehicle, dosen't matter how good they might be.

New 2012 ranger different much more powerfull 3.2 liter 5 cylinder, different suspension, different chassis,(looks stronger),
different transmission,( 6 speed against 5 speed). On paper sounds good.

Regards Alpero
FollowupID: 766314

Follow Up By: mikehzz - Tuesday, Jul 17, 2012 at 08:03

Tuesday, Jul 17, 2012 at 08:03
You guys have shocked me with those sort of economy figures. I have a 2004 diesel Jeep Grand that is getting up in the kilometres and I was thinking of a dual cab as a replacement. The Jeep gets around 9 l/100 km which I'm happy with and that is loaded and a roof tent on. I quite liked the D40 but 12.5 on the highway not towing.....I used to get 13 out of a petrol Pathfinder. The stickers on those utes all say under 9 for highway cycle, not 12-16. Fair dinkum, it's back to the drawing board for me. I hate burning money :-)
FollowupID: 766551

Follow Up By: Patrol22 - Friday, Jul 20, 2012 at 16:26

Friday, Jul 20, 2012 at 16:26
Mikezz....I believe the current D40 is a lot more frugal on fuel than my 2008 model. Mine is fitted with a DPF and once the 6 year warranty is up I fully intend replacing this with a DPF delete pipe. I understand that those who have done this are getting the 10-11 mark. With the new one I understand that they come sans the DPF and have a different rail and ECU. They also come with more horses and torque than mine. I'm talking about the 2.5 ltr D40 (4 cylinder diesel) - there is also the 3ltr V6 diesel and this is even more horse and torque......and a much smoother engine overall.
FollowupID: 766790

Reply By: Isuzumu - Saturday, Jul 14, 2012 at 14:29

Saturday, Jul 14, 2012 at 14:29
I have not heard how any of the new 4WD utes go towing as yet, but after test driving the Amarok (manual) BT 50 auto, Colorado manual and auto and last weekend the new D.Max. I would suggest you have a drive of the D.Max auto, we had nearly decided on the BT 50,but the Isuzu just seemed that like bit better and it's new auto was much nicer the the Mazda.
AnswerID: 490931

Reply By: coonick - Saturday, Jul 14, 2012 at 19:55

Saturday, Jul 14, 2012 at 19:55
I own a manual 2012 ranger. I do not tow a caravan but do tow a 1.5 ton boat.
To say the least it is awesome, has plenty of grunt for cruising and more than enough for safely overtaking whilst pulling a trailer. City wise driving I get between 9 - 11ltrs / 100km. I am known to be lead footed and with this beast it is difficult not to speed.
Have one speeding ticket since buying new car.
I do get 800kms out of a tank 80ltrs. i just returned from the flinders, i have a canopy and were 3/4 full of gear. still managed 800kms out of tank. I am sure whether towing small or large however you drive will depend on economy on any car. There is not a car around which has magical economy.
AnswerID: 490953

Follow Up By: Member - Peter H1 (NSW) - Saturday, Jul 14, 2012 at 20:06

Saturday, Jul 14, 2012 at 20:06
Hi, I have one on order so cannot comment , but try and see if they can help.

FollowupID: 766356

Reply By: Member - Netnut (VIC) - Saturday, Jul 14, 2012 at 20:48

Saturday, Jul 14, 2012 at 20:48
Hello Jan and Peter,

I have the new Mazda BT-50 Auto XTR and I recently towed my 18' van (1410 kg dry weight) with it over a trip of 700 km. It did it with ease ! The fuel consumption was around 14.5 l/100km since most of the travel was done at 90-95 kph. I used the sports shift mode and I never progressed beyond 5th gear which was around 2100 revs as I recall.

When necessary, I had no difficulty keeping up with highway traffic. For the one vehicle I had to pass, the BT-50 did it without great aplomb. I had a load in the tub as well as the van on behind.

There has been a report of a transmission failure when someone was towing a big van at speed in the tropics. I'm aware that autos have towed vans successfully for a long time and, provided this is done sympathetically, there should not be any premature failure of the transmisson. Both the Ranger and the Mazda have transmission coolers that tap into the engine's cooling system. This works fine. That said, if I was to tow a heavy van on seriously hot days at a goodly speed, I would probably install a secondary transmission cooler.


AnswerID: 490957

Follow Up By: shylok - Monday, Jul 16, 2012 at 19:05

Monday, Jul 16, 2012 at 19:05
Hello Peter & Jan
I have a 2012 rnager 4x2 dual cab and towing a 22' full van at around 2700 kg and I am very happy with the towing capacity and power of the ranger.
I tow in drive and if in a headwind or up hills I drop into sports mode and in 5ht gear it just goes and keeps me at 90 - 95 klms easily
Mileage at present is 13.6 on the computer but have not checked it with each refill yet
Very happy with it after the Prado
FollowupID: 766530

Reply By: Ferreting - Wednesday, Jul 18, 2012 at 20:09

Wednesday, Jul 18, 2012 at 20:09
Hi Jan & Peter,
We have owned a Px 3.2 Dual Cab Auto 4X4 for over 6 months now and tow an 18 ft. semi off road shower van ATM 2400 kg.
We have a tray back with Storage bins both under & on tray and carry 300 kg.incl. a ladder rack mounted Kayak.
Power is ample.
Towing no great problem.
Fuel consumption has averaged 15L/100 for over 10K Kms at ave speed 85kph using the recommended (by Ford) sport mode D ( 5th gear top ) and only using Cruise control on level or undulating terrain. Using lower gears manually selected on some hills for both climbing and descending saving fuel and the brakes.

Fuel consumption without van but with abovementioned load = 9.5 L/100k at 100kph ave using normal D mode and cruise.

All good so far eh ?.

But wait there's more !

Computer controlled Alternator - not the way to go Mr Ford.
This critter will not charge Aux. batteries properly - have to fit a Redarc BC/DC 1220 ING. $500 approx.thank you very much. Running with headlights on helps a little.

Rear springs to soft. I fitted heavier #2 wrapped leaves, gave a slight lift, no sag now (cost $ 400 fitted), personally I would not fit Air Bags, chassis integrity could be compromised.
( Chassis rails although larger in dimensions are made of thinner metal than previous model in my opinion ).
Ford doesn't recommend Weight Distribution Hitches for this model which would compromise the Anti Sway system and load sensing systems.

The only other problem I, and some others known to me , encountered is ( and I hope was ) a large parasitic battery voltage drain resulting in a No Start after 3 days of parking.
The computors and all their little friends take a long time to go to sleep after a run and some never sleep. Only one Ford Dealer ,out of three that I had check the systems ,found the problem which was via fuse #60 taking >100+ ma after 5 hours. During the first 20mins after shut down the drain is > 400ma then reduces to approx 200ma for a couple of hours until a light (pardon the pun ) sleep is induced. If leaving vehicle parked for more than a week I would recommend connecting a good multi stage battery charger so you will start especially on a cold winter morning.( I carry a 900amp jump starter as well as good long jump leads ). Blame the new wiring looms with KAM-BUS and Moduls - great stuff for the "Outback" Mr.Ford.

I hope this helps with your choice of a Tow vehicle.



AnswerID: 491217

Follow Up By: the coyote - Thursday, Aug 02, 2012 at 09:55

Thursday, Aug 02, 2012 at 09:55
Hi Ferreting,
I have had the exact same electrical drain on my Ranger ever since new, in the 7 months that I have owned it I would have had to jump start it about 6 times after leaving parked for as little as 1 day, I had the battery replaced under warranty when it was 1 month old believing it must have been faulty, it is a royal pain in the butt to have a new vehicle that lets you down so often (I do always carry jumper leads just in case) today will be another trip to the dealer to complain about the electrical discharge problem. did you get your electrical problem solved?

Apart from that I do love the Ranger, mine is a manual super cab, style side ute that I tow a 28 foot gooseneck/5h wheeler trailer with it as well as other trailers and equipment. it tows with ease, plenty of power and very good fuel economy for the size of the vehicle (approx 9l/100) but not quite as good on fuel as my previous pk ranger (8.2l/100)
The ride quality is pretty good and it does feel good on the road but with the different and softersuspension to the previous model I doesn't corner quite as hard/fast.

The 6 speed manual has the ratios a little close for normal unladen driving but it is superb for heavy towing and the lower ratio 1st and reverse gears are way ahead of the previous model and so much better than the nissans

I found that the standard exterior convex mirrors to be a complete waste of time and very hazardous when trying to back long trailers in tight areas so I replaced the mirror lenses with flat mirrors and it makes it so much easier and safer.

As for power the Ranger is top of its class, it will idle off in 3rd gear (a friend told me it would so I had to try it)

If I can get the electrics sorted out on this vehicle I will be be a very happy chappy.


The Coyote
FollowupID: 767709

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (9)