The smallest truck Ford would sell you before it introduced the Maverick a few years ago? That’s right, the Ranger.
Now, however, in 2024, the Ranger lives in between the smaller Maverick and full-size F-150.
Size-wise, the Ranger measures 210.6 inches long and 86.7 inches wide. That’…
Hot take: Is this the right-sized truck for most people? It carries stuff, it tows stuff, it fits in a normal parking spot.
Let’s compare specs against a 2000 Ford F-150 Extended Cab 4x4.
New Ranger: 210.6 inches long and 4415 pounds.
Old F-150: 225.9 inches long and 4229 pounds.
Both are rated to 7500 pounds.
Close enough?
The Ranger might be smaller than today’s full-size trucks, but the interior is roomy–plenty wide when two people are up front.
The big thing, at least for me: I can easily drive and park it. I don’t need to plan my approach like the Icon of the Seas cruise ship.
More to come but would also like to hear from the rest of you regarding the size of this. Too small, too big or just right?
And here's how the Ranger compares to its contemporaries:
I was following a Hyundai pickup the other day and thinking I wouldn’t mind some more seat time with that one.
Although, to be honest, I’d so drive a 1978-’87 El Camino.
I did not spend time in the Ranger but saw it at the Speedway this weekend when David had it there. It is a really good looking truck buy wow have mid-size pickups gotten big.
86.7" wide? is that a typo?
gearheadE30 said:86.7" wide? is that a typo?
77.8 is the number I have heard. The Raptor is 86.7 inches wide though I think
Ford lists 86.7 inches wide with mirror open, 79.0 inches with them folded back, 75.5 inches excluding mirrors.
I bet it's pretty sporty with the 2.7L. The 2.3L is no slouch but the 2.7L has 90 more ft lbs of torque.
The Ranger is kind of everything I wish the Jeep Gladiator was. It’s roomy, practical, peppier and easier to park. The top doesn’t come off, but I’m okay with that.
If I didn't have three kids I'd own one. It's tight with three kids in the back. But once the kiddos start going to college. I'll own one.
Another observation: The plushest seats since the ’70s.
David S. Wallens said:Another observation: The plushest seats since the ’70s.
You had my curiosity, now you have my attention. The older and more broken down I get, the more important a comfortable seat is to me.
And since we were recently mentioning Jake's towing reviews of trucks, here he is attempting to max out the Ranger's 7500 tow rating:
I missed it that they now have the small V6 in the lineup now.
That makes it very interesting in my book. I want that size in a truck and would love something that could easily take my cars to the track which would be about 5K LBS on a heavy trailer.
In reply to David S. Wallens :
I'm with you on the smaller is better. Even my Ridgeline is wider than I'd like. I'm having trouble believing that the Ranger is 8 inches wider. It certainly doesn't look the part. Edit: Ford Measures the mirrors. that makes sense. It still looks narrower, but that might be the proportions.
Someone mentioned the Hyundai. I think that it's saddled by Baja Syndrome: Whether that truck bed is useful or not, it just doesn't look serious. We Americans want our trucks to look like trucks dad gum it!
Tom_Spangler (Forum Supporter) said:David S. Wallens said:Another observation: The plushest seats since the ’70s.
You had my curiosity, now you have my attention. The older and more broken down I get, the more important a comfortable seat is to me.
The seats almost feel too plush. They have support, but they’re also soft and cushy. For something this high off the ground, pretty easy to get in and out of, too.
Colin Wood said:And here's how the Ranger compares to its contemporaries:
- Ford Ranger:
- Length: 210.6 inches
- Width: 86.7 inches
- Toyota Tacoma (XtraCab/Double Cab):
- Length: 213 inches/213 inches
- Width: 77.9 inches/77.9 inches
- Honda Ridgeline:
- Length: 210.1 inches
- Width: 78.6 inches
- Nissan Frontier (King Cab/Crew Cab SWB/Crew Cab LWB):
- Length: 210.2 inches/126 inches/139.8 inches
- Width: 73 inches/73 inches/73 inches
- Chevrolet Colorado/GMC Canyon:
- Length: 213 inches/217.9 inches
- Width: 74.3 inches/84.4 inches
And since the Gladiator was identified as being a useful "smaller than full size" truck:
FWIW, C&D has the width at 75.5 in, and so does Motor Trend. So, right in the middle of the competition.
Also, C&D has the 4-banger doing the quarter in 14.8, which is not too shabby. I'd like to see the real world comparison in fuel economy to the 2.7, but it might be worth saving a few bucks and going with the smaller engine, and I can't believe I just typed that..... 
David S. Wallens said:The seats almost feel too plush. They have support, but they’re also soft and cushy. For something this high off the ground, pretty easy to get in and out of, too.
My Dakota had seats like that. Very nice for the first hour. Not so much for longer trips, and the foam broke down quickly. The most comfortable seat that I ever had was bare fiberglass over foam molded to my body. I could happily sit there till my bladder gave out. soft doesn't necessarily equal comfortable.
Kreb (Forum Supporter) said:Someone mentioned the Hyundai. I think that it's saddled by Baja Syndrome: Whether that truck bed is useful or not, it just doesn't look serious. We Americans want our trucks to look like trucks dad gum it!
I look at the Hyundai Santa Cruz–and the Subaru Baja–as a truck-like car, as apposed to something like the Ford Maverick, which I look at as a car-like truck. (If that makes sense.)
Not that either is a bad thing, but the Santa Cruz and Maverick are different approaches to a similar problem.
Colin Wood said:Kreb (Forum Supporter) said:Someone mentioned the Hyundai. I think that it's saddled by Baja Syndrome: Whether that truck bed is useful or not, it just doesn't look serious. We Americans want our trucks to look like trucks dad gum it!
I look at the Hyundai Santa Cruz–and the Subaru Baja–as a truck-like car, as apposed to something like the Ford Maverick, which I look at as a car-like truck. (If that makes sense.)
Not that either is a bad thing, but the Santa Cruz and Maverick are different approaches to a similar problem.
Well if there's one good thing, it's that there are so many unibody truckettes on the road, the "Real truck guys" have gotten tired of continuously mocking them.
In reply to David S. Wallens :
I think it's just right. If I needed a truck and wasn't trying to pull a 5th-wheel camper, it's exactly what I would buy. I just don't need a truck.
In reply to Colin Wood :
For the love of The Flying Spaghetti Monster, if you're going to post a nearly half-hour long video..............give us a few paragraphs of text as a recap.
z31maniac said:In reply to Colin Wood :
For the love of The Flying Spaghetti Monster, if you're going to post a nearly half-hour long video..............give us a few paragraphs of text as a recap.
I had a friend that was working at a startup that did YouTube recaps using AI. It was great. You'd point it at a video URL and it would give you a nice little synopsis without having to sit through a half hour. Unfortunately, it did not thrive.
The next best thing is the automatic YouTube transcript. Expand the video description and it's at the bottom.
It's a little rough to read, but you can use it to identify what timestamps you want to visit.
You'll need to log in to post.
