By on August 14, 2018

This time last week, Ford was busy claiming the leaked Build & Price tool for the 2019 Ford Ranger was “inaccurate.” At the time, most of the internet got a quick glance at the truck’s pricing and options packages before the Blue Oval hauled it down.

The official configurator is now live. About the only “inaccuracies” we could find? The listing for a Regular Cab truck has been replaced by a listing for a two-wheel drive Extended Cab pickup with no box.

Ford representative and noted tweeter Mike Levine posted this message earlier today, although a photo of the mid-size pickup still doesn’t appear on the company’s online configurator as of this writing.

That said, let’s dive in to the official specs. The 2019 Ranger will start at $25,395 including destination, for a Ranger SuperCab 4×2 in base XL trim level. The SuperCab 4×2 in XLT trim is a $3,640 walk, while a SuperCab Lariat 4×2 will be priced from $33,305. All SuperCabs will have a 6-foot pan.

Seeking power to all four wheels? That will dent your wallet to the tune of $29,555 for an XL, $33,035 for an XLT, and $37,305 for the snazzy Lariat.

And yes, Ace of Base fans, it appears the XL will come equipped with air conditioning. Happy days.

Those looking for four forward swinging doors and a real back seat will have to pop for the SuperCrew model. They all have a 5-foot pan and 4 x 2 models will start at $27,615 for the XL, climbing to $31,210 for an XLT, and topping out at $35,480 for a Lariat. Four-wheel drive will add $4,160 to the XL sticker and $4,000 on a XLT or Lariat.

Alright Ford, you got us. We reported a price a full $10 too much for the SuperCrew 4 x 4 XL. There’s your “inaccuracy.”

The remainder of its options sheet appears unchanged. Despite your author’s proclivity for all things base model, if a person is looking for a 4 x 4 Ranger, particularly one decked out with FX4 gear, the XLT is the way to go. Why? Well, in order to spec the $1,295 FX4 package on a base XL, one also has to select the costly 101A and STX packages to the tune of $3,425. This pushes the estimated net price to $32,980.

Compare that to the $34,330 XLT shown above. The mid-level trim allows for the selection of FX4 as a stand-alone package. For the extra cheddar (a mere $1,350) one gets SYNC and Ford’s Co-Pilot 360 driver assist features, plus bigger screens in both the infotainment and gauge cluster. This is not to mention the XLT’s 110-volt and USB power points, MyKey tech, and a probable boost in resale value down the road.

 

It’s always fun to build the ZOMG THAT’S SO EXPENSIVE trim and, in this case, that leads us to the SuperCrew Lariat 4 x 4. Starting at $39,480 before options packages, a check-all-the-boxes example — like the White Platinum one shown above — rings in at $46,020.

For comparison purposes, a 2018 Chevy Colorado 4 x 2 with a four-banger starts at $21,195 and is endowed with a six-speed stick and touchscreen infotainment system. Nissan will sell you an older-than-Methuselah Frontier with two-wheel drive and a stick for $19,965. Toyota’s Tacoma starts at $26,395.

Ford will surely be quick to point out that the midsize truck market is not about who’s the cheapest and to that, they have a point. All of its competitors can be optioned up into budget-busting territory. Until we drive one, we won’t truly know how the Ranger stacks up against them.

Try your hand at configuring the 2019 Ford Ranger here.

[Images: Ford Motor Company]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

110 Comments on “2019 Ford Ranger Pricing (For Real, This Time)...”


  • avatar
    Kyree S. Williams

    Hmm. I haven’t found a midsize truck I like yet.

    – The Canyon and (especially) Colorado’s styling is kind of juvenile. Also, I lament their lack of features.
    – The Tacoma looks burly and masculine, but the ride is harsh and uncomfortable, and I don’t think the 3.5-liter is a great match, versus the old 4.0-liter
    – The Frontier is just plain old.

    But this could be the sweet spot for me, were I to buy a midsize pickup. Pricing is competitive, too.

    • 0 avatar
      dukeisduke

      I’m disappointed that only a five-foot bed is offered with the SuperCrew model – I like the six-foot bed on my ’13 Tacoma DoubleCab. Also only one engine offering, and no turbo-diesel.

    • 0 avatar
      Steve Biro

      I don’t mind that the Frontier is old. Old kind of works here – at least for me. And I can pick up a base version with manual transmission and air for $17-18K. The best part: I don’t have to take a lot of “features” that I don’t want.

      • 0 avatar
        Johnster

        I don’t mind the Frontier being old so much as I mind its comparatively lousy gas mileage. The Frontier is like, a trim, convenient, easy-to-handle sized pickup with the lousy gas mileage of a full-sized pickup.

  • avatar
    Carroll Prescott

    I like the base truck. Intriguing price as well. Don’t need a full-sized truck but this is very nice. And I love the steel wheels.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    So outfitted the way I like a Crew Cab XLT rings up at a few ticks under $33K. That seems perfectly reasonable – my biggest quibble is that the trailer package doesn’t automatically include locking rear axle (which is included on Canyon/Colorado with trailer tow.)

    And you can get the “keypad entry” for $95!

    • 0 avatar
      RSF

      The Keypad is still one of my favorite Ford features!

      • 0 avatar
        kamiller42

        Why a favorite feature? I have owned Fords for years. They come with those keypads. I have never used one once. What’s the use case?

        • 0 avatar
          JohnTaurus

          Several times I’ve used it, including when leaving the car for someone else to drive, hide the keys inside and give them the code. I’ve heard people say they do this at the airport to keep from taking their keys with them on the trip, since they won’t need them when they’re 2500 miles away from their car and house.

          Walk out to get your [insert random item here, lets say a cell phone charger or a recipt] in your pajamas/robe, don’t worry about finding the keys and bringing them. Just use the code. This also applies if you simply forgot your keys inside your home, but need to get into the vehicle to get something or put something in it.

          Not to mention, you’ll never have to call for help (or try to break in yourself) if you lock your keys in the car.

          • 0 avatar
            PrincipalDan

            Well if you look at the cost of remote start for the XLT trim level, someone like me would spec the keypad for less than $100 and then walk to the truck on a cold morning, start it, set my defroster, and then lock the fob inside and walk back in the house.

            The keypad becomes dang handy in that situation.

          • 0 avatar
            JohnTaurus

            That’s a good one, Dan. I never thought of that, but then again I live in an area where most people leave their keys in their vehicle all the time, lol.

            No, I don’t do it, but I can walk across the street right now to my neighbors and find their 2014 Silverado, 2003 Durango and 1995 Z-71 all with keys in them.

          • 0 avatar
            kamiller42

            JohnTaurus, I always have my keys with me. I would never leave my keys in the car on purpose. (My Mazda would not even allow locking the car with keys inside.) I also don’t write my ATM PIN on my ATM card. Thankfully, I’ve never accidentally locked my keys in the car. It has become more difficult to do with keyless start. Keys are always in my pocket.

            PrincipalDan, It never really gets that cold where I am. But if it did, I would start the truck and lock the truck while walking away using remote lock. Nowadays, my Fords have remote start, so this scenario is even less likely.

          • 0 avatar
            JohnTaurus

            I get it, it doesn’t work for you, you already made that clear. But, you asked what use it does have, and I (along with Dan) gave you plenty of uses for the feature. There are more I’m sure, that’s just what I (we) have used (and seen) it used for.

            If only all of us were as perfect, we wouldn’t need convenience features to make up for our horrible deficiencies.

          • 0 avatar
            White Shadow

            Some of you guys need to get with the times. Lots of cars today can be unlocked witg your cell phone. Some can even give an “electronic key” to a friend via cell phone that he can use to enter/start/drive the car. No need for an outdated keypad. Ford should put a tape deck in their keypad equipped cars.

          • 0 avatar
            Dan

            “Some of you guys need to get with the times. Lots of cars today can be unlocked witg your cell phone. Some can even give an “electronic key” to a friend via cell phone that he can use to enter/start/drive the car. No need for an outdated keypad. Ford should put a tape deck in their keypad equipped cars.”

            When I’m parking at the beach, gym, trail head, etc. I want to keep my fragile, expensive, and annoying phone on me even less than I want my keys.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            Some of us have more than one car and may have a half a dozen or more keys to buildings. So for me that means I always carry the key chain with the building keys and select the key chain for the vehicle I’m driving at the moment. However there are times when I realize I need something out of one of the other cars and the keyless entry allows me to open the vehicle w/o having to go back into the house to get the keys. When the kids were still home it allowed them to get in the vehicle w/o keys to retrieve the coat/backpack/book they forgot in the car.

            As Dan mentioned I’ve used to use it to lock the keys in the running car when it was warming up on a freezing morning many times.

        • 0 avatar
          ClutchCarGo

          I have used the feature when going to the beach or canoeing. It’s nice to know that the keys are safely with the car and I don’t have to worry about losing them somewhere in the wild. I’ve also used it to leave the keys behind when going to a ball game where they are just one more thing to set off a metal detector.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            I find the key pad very handy. I can get in my truck without keys/fob. I can lock the doors when running the truck in cold weather.

          • 0 avatar
            White Shadow

            “I find the key pad very handy. I can get in my truck without keys/fob. I can lock the doors when running the truck in cold weather.”

            I can do the same in my Grand Cherokee without needing an exterior keypad. Press the lock button on the door handle locks it even if the engine is running. And I keep my keys in my pocket, so the door always magically unlocks for me whenever I touch the inside of the door handle.

        • 0 avatar
          cdrmike

          Thought it was useless too until I took a job doing dirty work where I didn’t want my keys in the rain with me all day. Also nice to be able to lock the keys in the truck when swimming or beaching.

      • 0 avatar
        stuki

        Ditto!

        A bit simpler than paying $10K for a trim level allowing you to accomplish the same thing (leaving the keys in the truck) by way of a cell phone app.

    • 0 avatar
      Sigivald

      The keypad also (in addition to the above conveniences) lets you lock or unlock all the doors with just a press.

      (Lock, hit 7/8 and 9/0 at once, even without entering the code.

      To unlock all doors, after entering the code, which unlocks the driver’s door, hit any button.

      Specifics vary by model and version, but I think they all have 7-and-9 locking, which is useful for ensuring it’s locked up tight when leaving, if you have passengers or someone is slow closing the door, etc.

      Equally, at least on some models, multiple entry codes can store multiple seat/mirror memory positions, I believe.)

  • avatar
    gtem

    I built an extended cab 4wd XLT with the offroad package, came out to $34,400-ish, doesn’t sound unreasonable for an MSRP, although I suspect there won’t be any crazy wheeling dealing on price for a year or two. I like the exterior styling on these the best out of all the current midsizers except the Frontier maybe. I’m curious to hear about the real world driveability/performance and fuel economy of the 2.3 Ecoboost+10A in this application.

  • avatar
    Lou_BC

    Too big, too expensive, can’t compete with a full sized, NO regular cab…….. And it’s a Ford.

    There, got all of the b!tching out of the way ;)

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus

      You forgot: “rabble rabble Chicken Tax rabble rabble”. Oh, and not only is it too big, its also too small, to say nothing of it being too tall and too short, plus too trucky but not trucky enough.

      • 0 avatar
        el scotto

        Won’t fit in my garage that allows you to open one door on a model-T if you’re turned sideways. Sound deadening? safety devices? Americans have gone soft I tell you. It builds character, grit, and old-fashioned gumption to drive a truck with no AC and vinyl seats on a 95+ degree day. This is for snowflakes and poseurs.

  • avatar
    kamiller42

    “For comparison purposes…” Um, did Matthew actually spec out the most expensive Ranger and follow it up with a list of base models from competitors? Apples and oranges. No comparison.

    • 0 avatar
      Sigivald

      I’ll grant him that he did explicitly say that the competitors could be optioned to the moon, too, but it’s still not great writing.

      Compare bases. Compare high trims. Don’t cross-compare, even by implication.

  • avatar
    Lou_BC

    Good looking truck. The Colorado sat at the top of my *next truck* list but this might move to the top.
    Usually what has killed my purchase of a smaller truck in the past is the fact that I can get a full sized truck for less money but with more features and more capability.

  • avatar
    Lie2me

    Nice truck, when I have time I’ll have to compare pricing with the F-150

  • avatar
    JohnTaurus

    $33,010 for my XL SuperCrew 4×4 with locking rear diff, trailer tow, keypad and sliding rear window.

    They don’t show the chassis cab like I want, so I don’t know if I can get it as a SuperCrew 4×4 XL. I would love to put a drop-side flatbed on it. I realize it’s only 5′ on the SuperCrew, but I believe it will be far more versatile than a traditional bed, with the ability to load from the side, etc.

    I can’t believe I agree with Caroll above, but I absolutely love the silver steelies. Oh, and I can’t have the burnt orange color, because it requires an option package that deletes the steelies. So, blue is fine. Just so long as it isn’t Fleet White, Rental Silver or Burn-Me-Up-Scottie Black.

  • avatar
    Vulpine

    Having looked at the configurator and even pricing out a Lariat and an XLT, the XLT seems to offer the better value at a lower price when including similar options for equivalency. My only real concern is the 2.3L Ecoboost as if I choose to purchase a travel trailer, I would almost guarantee the turbo would be running hard at highway speed and using more fuel than an NA V6 with the same 300/300 hp/torque ratings.

    Oh, I like the looks of it well enough but my experience with Ford is just not that great. I’m going down this afternoon to place an order on a Colorado. Yes, it’s bigger than I want but it looks to me like the better bang for the buck while still smaller than full sized.

    • 0 avatar
      Sigivald

      I wouldn’t expect it to be running that hard at highway *cruise*.

      Cruising is remarkably easy on power even with a trailer, unless it’s enormous.

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        When a rig has a 7500# towing limit, even with 300+ horses, you’re loading that engine pretty doggone well. That turbo is going to get rotten fuel mileage under that load, as proven by all their other Ecoboost engines on the F-series trucks.

    • 0 avatar
      Vulpine

      Placed my order for a Colorado Z71 this evening. Reasonably well equipped and priced at $42K with tax and tags before incentives and discounts. Also giving me a $2K credit for conquest incentive off of my old Ranger (not even counting any trade-in it might garner.)

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        You will regret that purchase.

        Cancel it stat.

        I don’t understand how rational humans can touch, drive and then buy the Colorado, which is cheaply made with horrible parts, is going to have (already does) typical Guangzhou-Guadalajara Motors (GM) reliability problems, for anywhere that price.

        You’re buying a Chinese”Mexican parts bin truck for birth of 40 large – it’s insane.

        A buddy of mine if a stubborn A$$ Guangzhou-Guadalajara Motors (GM) repeat buyer, and bought a new 2018 Silverado Z71 with an MSRP of $48,xxx for $38,xxx Out The Door (so, nearly 13 thousand off sticker given sales tax, other b.s) 5 months ago, and he’s already had it back list dealer 3 times for an issue with the engine, transmission and touchscreen head unit replacement.

        GARBAGE ROLLING DUMPSTER FIRES!

        • 0 avatar
          ajla

          So is there any mid-size truck you like?

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            Anything other than the Colorado; nearly anything other.

            In fact, as my fans will note, or have to concede, I did not comment on the articles with renderings, then, actual pics, interior and exterior, of the new Ranger.

            I actually like it, though it’d be smart to get one off the lot in a while at a lower transaction price, rather than paying a premium to be an early adopter (IMO).

            As much as I rip on Ford (and HACKett and Farley, who deserve it), Ford has done right by its customers with prior Rangers, and this one looks nice. The reliability will certainly be multitudes better than any Chinese-Thai-Vietnamese-Mexican parts knock-down kit Colorado. And Ford actually builds their trucks in the U.S., of mostly American-sourced parts (good on Ford; give credit where it’s due).

            I’d also buy a Tacoma – even with the Toyota tax, and given that it’s somewhat dated – over the Colorado by Guangzhou, just because of reliability/durability.

            But most of all, I’d wait for the new midsize RAM to come out, because RAM division is KILLING IT in terms of material quality, design, detail, etc., in every which way p, and they are moving all truck production back to the U.S., and using way more American-made and sourced parts than Guangzhou-Guadalajara Motors (GM).

            Don’t let the Chinese Win! Don’t buy GM Guangzhou knock-down kits imported from China!

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            @ajla: In my own case, no. The Colorado is the best of a poor group. Bigger than I like in every dimension but at least smaller than full-sized, which is gross overkill for my needs. Putting the same drivetrain into a 90s-vintage S-10 would have made much more sense. Ford should do the same, making the Ranger physically similar to the 90s-vintage model with that same 2.3L Ecoboost and 10-speed tranny. The result would be 30+ highway mileage and still able to tow 7000#.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            @DeadWeight:

            You may consider the Colorado to be the worst of the bunch… who knows, maybe you’re right. But my experience with GM products compared to Ford over the last 45 years of driving says that the Ford is the least reliable of the bunch, especially over the long term.

            Ford is the most popular, I will grant that. I even acknowledge that the new Ranger is a decent-looking truck–better than almost all of the full-sized models with the exception of the Ram. But that doesn’t make up for the poor quality of the majority of Ford’s products and how they tend to ‘loosen up’ over time and garner rattles and squeaks, often inside of their first year on the road. Again, personal experience, supplemented by statements from many Ford-owning friends and acquaintances. Oh, they all loved their Fords when they bought them but they almost never bought another Ford after that. And now Ford is having financial troubles which could indicate that their survival in the last recession, while good planning at the time, may have only delayed the circumstances that forced a government bail-out of GM and Chrysler.

            Is GM really that bad? I don’t think so. Most certainly, FCA isn’t nearly as bad as most would have you believe–but you have to own one yourself to realize that. I’ve owned all three brands and have learned that reputations do not live up (or down) to reality.

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            Ford & GM (Guangzhou-Guadalajara Motors) are a mixed bag, all over the board, when it comes to product quality.

            It depends on the vehicle in question.

            Nothing good ever came from an entirely new GM (Guangzhou-Guadalajara Motors) product, almost without exception. You will get burned. Make sure that you post honest and frequent updates of problems you are having if you follow through and spend an insane amount of money on that plastic fantastic Colorado.

            The friend I was speaking of with the new Silverado concedes that it’s built cheaper, with cheaper interior materials, and thinner sheet metal all around, on top of the problems he’s having mechanically, than his last Silverado. He hates it and I tell him told you so very frequently to rub the salt in the wounds.

            As far as Ford, you make it sound as if GM (Guangzhou-Guadalajara Motors) has relative Toyota’reliability/durability in contrast.

            That’s a hilarious assertion, particularly when it comes to half ton pickups.

            The F-Series is the world’s best selling vehicle, and has been the best selling pickup and vehicles in th U.S. for 3 decades (4 decades?).

            I’ve rarely seen any vehicle with as loyal a customer base as the F-150, along with as a rock-solid, repeat customer base.

            I’ve conceded that GM (Guangzhou-Guadalajara Motors) has managed to do some FEW things well, in the past, such as push the limit (literally, in terms of getting the most out of old tech) with pushrod V8s (also acknowledge that the 3800 was a heck of a V6 for its long tenure in terms of reliability and NVH), and typically making/implementing very good automatic transmissions. Some of their recent chassis have been tight and well engineered (i.e.Alpha/Omega even if the vehicles surrounding them are poorly executed with non-competitive materials and dismal reliability).

            That’s where the good ends with GM (Guangzhou-Guadalajara Motors, and now that they are essentially a more-Chinese-than-American automaker, we’re seeing them come out with many successor vehicles that are far worse than their predecessors (Cruze, Equinox, Malibu, Silverado, etc).

            It’s HILARIOUS that you claim GM (Guangzhou-Guadalajara Motors) vehicles stay “tight” over the long-haul. With few exceptions, they deteriorate quickly into rattle cans.

            You’re going to get burned on that Colorado; it’s a cheaply built, overpriced truck, but never say that you weren’t warned.

            Buy American assembled, of mostly American-sourced parts vehicles,’like the Ranger, upcoming mid-size RAM,’or Tundra.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            @DW: We will see, my friend. I’m going into this with open eyes as I am aware that pre-bankruptcy GMs did have their issues and made many mistakes I’m sure they’re regretting now. Even so, getting 160,000 miles out of a ’96 Camaro along with 32mpg on the highway AND nary a rattle or squeak in ten years kind of leads me to think even with their mistakes, they also made some good cars and trucks. I’ve never managed more than 90K miles out of any Ford I’ve owned with the average mileage far, FAR lower. Even my Saturn, a first-year VUE, achieved 130,000+ in twelve years of ownership. Dropping Saturn was one of GM’s biggest mistakes.

            However, as I stated before, the Colorado came across as the best available, even including the upcoming Ranger based on available data. I don’t trade every 3-4 years. I don’t lease. I buy and I own a car until I no longer trust it to meet my needs (including handling as with over a million miles under my wheels I’ve developed a ‘feel’ for when a car isn’t handling right even when the mechanics say it’s “within specification.” I’m not willing to wait another two years for a mid-sized rig FCA “might” bring out; I’ve already waited five years to see if anything smaller with the capabilities I need would ever arrive. I’ve been patient to a fault and inherited the ’97 Ranger I’m currently driving… also with a 2.3L under the hood but lacking the turbo. Unfortunately, it has a regular cab and I need space behind the front seats to carry gear and cargo I don’t want to leave in the bed. So I’m trading up and I’ve chosen the Colorado as the best of a bad bunch… based on my needs exclusively. The Toyota falls short with my wife behind the wheel as she’s 6′ tall and the steering wheel can’t clear her thighs with wheel at full height and the seat all the way back; the Colorado fits her far better than any of the imports that are classed as “mid-sized”, not including the Honda which is far closer to full sized even with being a unibody truck.

      • 0 avatar
        Scoutdude

        @ Vulpine, Congrats on your purchase, or order. I’m a little surprised with you went for a Z71 from your previous posts I figured you wouldn’t want the extra height.

        • 0 avatar
          Vulpine

          Don’t be surprised if I later state I’m dropping it back down to stock height or lower. Depends a lot on how tall it is. If it’s no higher than my ’08 Wrangler stock, I may leave it alone but I’d rather see it ride lower for better fuel economy and comfort.

  • avatar
    jh26036

    $33k and change for a crew cab 4×4 with e-locker and spray in bedliner. Not a bad deal. I expect 15% on the hood when you actually go to pay for it.

  • avatar
    EquipmentJunkie

    Ford has a winner here. The pricing seems right. I just hope that Ford puts forth an effort on the upcoming Bronco like they did with this Ranger.

  • avatar
    kamiller42

    “If only all of us were as perfect, we wouldn’t need convenience features…”

    Ford has been pushing keypads for a long time on a lot of vehicles (nearly all probably). If it was truly a convenience feature, it would have been copied by other automakers and put on most of their vehicles. The fact it wasn’t says everything about the usefulness of the feature.

    Of all the cases brought forward, only one illustrated a deficiency. My Mustang doesn’t have a keypad. It’s deficient. I’ll put it up for sale.

    • 0 avatar
      JimZ

      when you grow up you’ll learn that other people have different priorities, wants, and needs from yours.

      sheesh, what is it with guys who act like “if I don’t need something, nobody does.”

      nevermind how butt-hurt you sound about the existence of an optional feature nobody is forcing you to buy.

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      Trivia time: Without Googling it, who can tell me what the first FoMoCo vehicles were to have the keypad? They’re older than you might think.

    • 0 avatar
      Sigivald

      I love the keypad, and I’d love to see it on a lot more vehicles.

      “Popular” and “useful” aren’t strictly synonyms – keyless entry gets people a lot of the benefit of the keypad and is sexier, so why copy Ford?

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      It is my understanding that Ford wanted to do away with it on several occasions but people like it.

      I specifically got my F150 in XLT trim versus XL because I was in the Army and I lost my keys at PT on a couple occasions and as a best case had to run with a giant key fob in my pocket. Much easier to leave my key in the console with my phone and wallet and lock it up.

      • 0 avatar
        Scoutdude

        Ford did do away with it, there are no 1998’s with it. However they quickly heard from dealers that customers were unhappy it was gone. So for 1999 they brought it back and started expanding availability, both across vehicle lines and down to lower trims.

    • 0 avatar
      brn

      I have the keypad on both our vehicles and use it regularly.

      GM has copied it. I just speced a Colorado and it was listed as an option.

    • 0 avatar
      White Shadow

      I agree. It’s a silly feature that’s basically useless. Or maybe I should instead say that there’s really nothing useful about it that separates it from most modern cars.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        All brands will eventually offer the keypad entry option. It’s just that good of an idea.

        I guess automakers have been ignoring it, but now that it’s one of the more exciting things to hit the automotive aftermarket, in the form of a wireless keypad, automakers have no choice but to give in.

        • 0 avatar
          White Shadow

          Um…no. You must be living in your own fantasy land. Keypad entry has been around for a long, long time now. If it hasn’t had mass adoption yet, it never will. Not to mention it’s ancient technology at this point. Like most people, I have my cell phone with me at all times. I can locate my car, lock/unlock my car, start my car, download destinations to my car, allow a friend or family member access to my car or even allow them to drive it with my cell phone. A keypad to gain entry is Fred Flintstone at this point in the game.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            That’s news to me. George Jetson having keypad entry on his ride I can believe. Maybe it’s been so expensive, it was off my radar, and believe me I’m in the used auto industry and have yet to see aftermarket keypad entry in the wild, if they’re so mainstream, as you say,

            The systems are around $60 now so I’ll be upgrading my LX/STX work trucks that have power locks. A lot of times they’re kept running all day, even when drivers have to step away from the trucks for extended periods. They’ll pay for themselves exponentially with 1st truck that doesn’t get stolen.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            See there is this thing called a patent and maybe Ford wasn’t willing to license that tech to automakers that they did not at least partner with. Nissan offered it back when they were involved in the Quest/Villager joint venture but once that ended so did Nissan’s use.

            Now that the patent has expired there are a number of companies that have aftermarket solutions and apparently it is not available from the factory on some GM’s according to another poster.

      • 0 avatar
        Jagboi

        I find it a very useful feature. When I am going to the junkyard and climbing in and under cars to remove parts I have had my keys fall out of my pocket more than once. Not a nice thing, especially in winter when they fall into the snow and disappear.

        With the keypad, I can leave the keys and phone (which is even more likely to get broken at a junkyard)in the car an unlock the car with the keypad.

        I think it’s a great feature for people who actually do active things before/after driving their vehicle.

        • 0 avatar
          Vulpine

          That’s why I use a carabiner to clip my keys to my belt. I’ve caused far too many holes in my pockets with key rings. Since I started clipping them, I haven’t had a single holey pocket.

  • avatar
    RHD

    Even with this addition to the market, there is still a gap in the true mini-truck segment. The Hi-Lux/LUV/620/Mighty Max/P’uP trucks offered utility, economy and affordability, were easily customized and gained their manufacturers some loyal customers. Whoever offers a decent sub-20K mini-truck would sell a bunch of them.

  • avatar
    30-mile fetch

    It will be interesting to see if this takes a bite out of the Tacoma’s a$$.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      “Ranger” has some positive brand equity in this segment so I bet it’ll bite the Tacoma, but I also expect it won’t outright surpass it in sales. ‘Yota runs deep in smaller trucks.

      The bigger deal is with GM. In my dreams they respond with a 5.3L option for the Canyorado. In reality, it’ll likely just be increased incentives and then eventually replacing the 3.6L with the compliance 2.7T.

      • 0 avatar
        PrincipalDan

        TRIPOWER! (Gawd what an awful name.)

        At least Thriftpower would have been a bit more evocative. I despise that they are offering a turbo 4 in a full size truck, at least they could give it a catchy name.

  • avatar
    silverfin

    The Ranger might be the right small pick-up to tow behind my Class A diesel motorhome…..problem with the CR-V is no bed for the motorcycle. Does anyone know if the Ranger can be towed with all 4 wheels on the ground? The F150 4×4 has a special mode for this and most Ford automatics can be towed…guess I will have to wait for the owners manual to come out to verify.

  • avatar
    brettc

    I’d take mine in Ace of Base format, either in blue or white. Don’t need anything fancy. As long as it can haul things, it would meet my criteria.

    Even in base format, it’s still much nicer than any of the trucks my dad owned while he was around. That’s good enough for me. Plus he’d likely be proud of my thriftiness.

  • avatar
    Ryan

    I continue to be impressed with Ford’s new and or up and coming vehicles. I took a brief look at the XLT trim, 4 door on their site. The Ranger is good looking, the right size, and a reasonable price. My current rig is six years old and I plan to replace it in the next 2-3 years. For the first time since 2003 I will give something other than a Toyota/Subaru/Honda an honest look.

  • avatar
    Adam Tonge

    It costs $32,000 and you only get 4 speakers, no sync, no touch screen, no cruise control, no e-lock axle. Yuck. I expect a better value from a seven year old vehicle that had a huge reductions in permutations for the North American market. Only one frame size, engine, and transmission.

    • 0 avatar
      30-mile fetch

      Well, it is competing against a Tacoma that isn’t exactly a spring chicken or home run. The config I’d want, XLT 4door with FX4 is $37k, very close to a TRD Off road Taco. Haven’t scrutinized features yet, though.

      I wonder ifmost buyers know or care of the truck’s age. Would it be more off-putting to low-ball the competition right out of the gates,leading people to wonder what’s wrong with it?

    • 0 avatar
      JimZ

      or you come to realize that cars/trucks don’t magically get a lot cheaper to build just because they’re a bit smaller.

    • 0 avatar
      Sigivald

      … what?

      The $26.5k XL with 101A group has 6 speakers and Sync.

      (I think they all have cruise control, just not active cruise control.)

      Yes, you CAN spec a crew cab 4×4 up to $32k without Sync.

      So? Don’t do that if you want Sync?

      • 0 avatar
        Adam Tonge

        That’s 4×2 SuperCab though. 101A is required to get cruise control. I’m talking about the SuperCrew. If you want 4×4 and cruise, that is $32,000.

        • 0 avatar
          brn

          Your initial post left out both the 4×4 and the Supercrew. You changed the rules later.

          • 0 avatar
            Adam Tonge

            That’s why I clarified. And who is buying a 4×2 SuperCab XL besides fleets? Humans can’t fit in the back.

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            “That’s why I clarified. And who is buying a 4×2 SuperCab XL besides fleets? Humans can’t fit in the back.”

            yes they can. this has “normal” rear seats, not the useless sideways jump seats the PN150 Ranger had.

          • 0 avatar
            Adam Tonge

            I have seen the seats. I have sat in one. No one would be able to sit behind me. My 5 year old would be uncomfortable behind my wife. The seats are there, but they function more as storage.

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            I’ve sat in several. I would be able to fit in the rear with the driver’s seat positioned for me.

          • 0 avatar
            Adam Tonge

            I was not able to do that. I was not able to get my ankles feet between the back of the drivers seat and front of the rear seat.

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            well, how tall are you? not fitting because you’re taller (or much taller) than average isn’t the same as “humans can’t exist back there.”

            like the guy I saw on another site complaining that he can’t fit in a lot of cars because he’s a “bit tall” at 6′ 9″. Er, no, you’re over a foot taller than the mean.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            @Adam T: “I have seen the seats. I have sat in one. No one would be able to sit behind me. My 5 year old would be uncomfortable behind my wife. The seats are there, but they function more as storage.”

            — Then leave the seats folded up and use the space for the purpose it was meant… as storage. The back seats in my Colorado will only be folded down when my wife and I visit her step mother and niece, both of whom are very small people right now. Yes, I purchased an extended cab and my truck will carry my dog on the floor of the back seat far more often than it will ever carry people back there. I intend to learn how to remove that plinth for the seats just to open up more floor space since the seats will spend 99% of the time folded up against the back wall of the cab.

  • avatar
    slavuta

    If you don’t move loose dirt and cinder block around, why do you need it?

  • avatar
    deanst

    I’m not in the market for a pickup, but if was forced to buy one, I’d just go down to the local ram dealer and get a quad cab, 4×4 hemi for less than $30,000.

    • 0 avatar
      jack4x

      Bingo.

      It’s not THAT much harder to park a full size. And V8 vs turbo 4 for the same money is game over for me.

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        It’s not the •parking• of a full-sized truck that’s the problem, it’s the agility and the physical size itself that’s the problem. A smaller truck can go places the bigger truck can’t simply because it’s 10″ narrower and about a foot shorter with equivalent cab and bed configurations. Personally, I’d have preferred something closer to the ’90s and older-vintage Ranger, but it’s taking the OEMs a long time to realize they screwed up by making their mid-sizers bigger than the older ones.

  • avatar
    mike978

    Do you get anything else for the $4000 with four-wheel drive? Seems a lot just for four wheel drive.

  • avatar
    pdq

    Is it just me or is that “configurator” a visual clusterf*ck ? I got to about stage 3 and gave up.

    I’m part of their target market too. I have a ’99 Ranger XLT SuperCab 4.0 5 sp. with 317k miles on it. I love the truck.

    But I hate that damn website.

    • 0 avatar
      brn

      Well, the configurator isn’t official yet, so it may have some bugs.

      I’ve been playing with it on a chromebook and haven’t had any issues, other than when I do a compare, it doesn’t list anything.

      • 0 avatar
        Drzhivago138

        I don’t like that the “interior” tab doesn’t actually show an interior that corresponds to the vehicle you’re configuring, but that will probably change.

    • 0 avatar
      Adam Tonge

      It’s way better than some of the Build & Price sites. None of them are great. One of the issues here is that it appears Ford ported over some of the F150 configurator. It gives you the options to pick engines, drive, bed length, cabs, etc. The Ranger has way less permutations so it seems unnecessary. The F150 Build and Price tool was good for narrowing down options and builds. Here, you get two cab choices, bed options that are predetermined, and one engine.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • dividebytube: When I’m down south I’m taken aback by the number of decent looking old trucks and even G...
  • redapple: RED…. Great catch. Love it.
  • teddyc73: What an ugly rear end.
  • FreedMike: Have you ever heard a Ghibli’s exhaust? I’d say that’s one big selling point. Otherwise,...
  • deanst: After the car ages several years, and you’re driving in the cold weather, what is the real range – 100...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States