Thinking about a Ford Ranger

M

Mtns2Skies

Final Approach
Joined
Jul 12, 2008
Messages
5,631
Display Name
Display name:
Mtns2Skies
Well my current 2010 Platinum F150 is starting to show it's age, It's got 160,000 miles on it, but has never had issues until now. Albeit relatively minor, it is definitely getting older. Fuel sender is starting to go bad, I have reasons to believe the VVT sensor is going bad, moonroof track broke, the power folding running boards broke long ago and it needs new tires. I thought I might want to start looking around at other vehicles while my truck still has some value and before I have to start putting a substantial amount of money into it. It's also got the dinosaur of an engine with the 5.4L Triton V8 Modular engine. It was the very last year this engine was put into an F150 and something more modern would be nice.

The truth of the matter is, this vehicle has never towed a trailer in its life (Purchased from my parents) and I don't forsee needing to do this except once in a blue moon. That being said, I would like something that can tow if necessary, but more importantly having a truck bed is incredibly useful, but my F150 is big and burly and can be a problem around some parts of town. More importantly for me is off-roadability, as that really is something I do on an amateur level. Additionally, the 2010 F150 does not have an option for keeping an open rear-diff when 4High is selected which makes it a pain for highway driving with snow. I generally like to keep speeds below about 50mph with the diff lock on, but sometimes patchy interstates call for more speed than that, but 2 wheel drive doesn't offer the same control as 4 wheel drive.

I've been following the development of the Ford Ranger for quite some time and Ford offered a deal while I was at the Chicago auto show to test-drive a vehicle and receive $50, so I thought I might as well check it out.

I guess marketing works, because I tried a 2019 Ranger and I absolutely fell in love. If I had to design a truck that perfectly fits my needs... this would be it. The only downside I was able to see was the relatively small fuel tank of 18gal. It drove very nicely, has a setting for 4H as well as an option to lock the diff independently of what wheel drive you're in. I took it on some rougher roads during the drive and the suspension felt advanced and responsive. The engine had plenty of power and gobs of low-end torque with that spritely 4-cyl 2.3L ecoboost.

Some of the things I love most about the Ranger are the things it doesn't have. It doesn't have a damped tailgate with a step or a split or anything to make it heavy and expensive. It's a simple tailgate that's been around for 100 years, and I like that, though the tailgate does lock with the rest of the vehicle. It has a bed light, 110V outlets, no moonroof which has given me a lot of headache in my current vehicle. It has good fuel economy, it's nimble on the road. It has a pretty unbelievable "crawl control" mode that is auto-pilot for off-road driving, it allows you up to 20mph and the brain of the computer can get you up some pretty serious terrain.

I definitely see a Ford Ranger sometime in my near future. Now most dealerships don't have very many Rangers yet as they're new off the assembly line in the US, and this dealership only had one and it wasn't one I'd be interested in. So there's one I am interested in coming in mid April which is perfect as I'm currently working to switch jobs to a place more local to me and wouldn't want to get a new vehicle before then.

I'm not just a "Ford guy" to be a Ford guy, I don't have brand loyalty, but it just so happens that I really do like Fords products best, but if a competitor came out with something better I'd jump ship pretty readily. I'll go into why I'm not such a fan of the competitor's midsize vehicles.

Honda Ridgeline: No off-roadability, and well, look at it.

Chevy Colorado: This would be my second choice, but it's a heavier vehicle, I don't like Chevy's interiors at all and the package I would want (the Bison) would cost about 15k more. Visibility is also pretty rough. The one thing I love is the option for a Diesel engine, but not quite enough for me to go this direction.

Toyota Tacoma: It's just an outdated vehicle, it's still rocking drum brakes in the rear, a birfield joint and an antiquated drive train. The cosmetic hood scoop just kills me too... I hate cosmetic venting and scoops on vehicles. All that being said, they do come in manual which is a very nice feature for me and best in-class articulation for off-road. They also have a crawl-control mode, but it's limited to 5mph and is a bit more dated. While the Tacoma is one hell of a truck, I just have a hard time spending what Toyota wants for a vehicle with such outdated design characteristics.

Nissan Frontier: Well, it hasn't been updated since 2004, but for some reason people still buy it. Not a bad truck, just ancient and with terrible fuel economy. They are cheap though, but again lacking too many modern amenities that are just standard now.

Jeep Gladiator: Not yet out, probably going to be quite expensive and that Wrangler platform just lacks some of the niceties for the grocery getting that I'll be doing 95% of the time.

YMMV, but I sure thought the Ranger was exactly what I was looking for.
2019-ford-ranger-8.jpg
 
Last edited:
As long as you can deal with that four-banger, you should be good. I'm thinking about the Bronco (which should have similar underpinnings) to replace my Flex.
 
Hmmmm. I'll have to look into that. But I suspect the bed will be just a tad too small for my needs.
 
It's a nice looking truck. As for that "four banger", Kenny, it's rated at 270 HP/310 lb/ft torque. That should pull whatever's thrown in the back or hooked up to it.

M2S, it's rated at 21/26 MPG. The 18 gallon tank will provide pretty long legs.

For the cynical side of me, I see the ads show a $23K cost, but my local dealer is selling models that ring up at $33K. A 50% increase?

I remember when buying the biggest V-8 in an American four door sled cost something like $78 more. :D
 
3393RP said:
It's a nice looking truck. As for that "four banger", Kenny, it's rated at 270 HP/310 lb/ft torque. That should pull whatever's thrown in the back or hooked up to it.

M2S, it's rated at 21/26 MPG. The 18 gallon tank will provide pretty long legs.

For the cynical side of me, I see the ads show a $23K cost, but my local dealer is selling models that ring up at $33K. A 50% increase?

I remember when buying the biggest V-8 in an American four door sled cost something like $78 more. :D
Click to expand...

The pricing was always my biggest argument about the midsize trucks. Most of the models out there sell for the price of an XLT F-150! I have no use for a midsize because I do need the towing capacity, but the Ranger or Taco would be too on my list if I were in the market.
 
SoonerAviator said:
The pricing was always my biggest argument about the midsize trucks. Most of the models out there sell for the price of an XLT F-150!
Click to expand...
Well, not really. If you look at apples to apples, component to component there's no real price comparison. A fully loaded Ranger Lariat is 43k, a fully loaded F150 Lariat is 60-65k. Could you get a lower end F150 for the price of a higher end Ranger? Sure, but I'd prefer the higher end Ranger for what I want to do, and I prefer the smaller size.
 
Mtns2Skies said:
Nissan Frontier: Well, it hasn't been updated since 2002, but for some reason people still buy it. Not a bad truck, just ancient and with terrible fuel economy. They are cheap though, but again lacking too many modern amenities that are just standard now.
View attachment 71981
Click to expand...
Dated? Meh if you say so. When I bought in 2013 it was far and away the best value out there and I've been very happy with it since. I don't think you could touch a 4wd truck with bluetooth and a backup camera for anywhere near the price at that time.

Of course Rangers didn't exist then. If they had, I would've been looking hard at one. If I had it to do now? Well I've always liked the Rangers and those coloados sure do look nice. But I still don't think either of them beats the Frontier on bang for the buck basis.
If I were in the market today I'd get ajoanot Frontier without question. Anything else is spending more for less imo.
 
I was seriously looking at the Ford Ranger and the Chevrolet Colorado ZR2 Trail Boss. I liked the option of a diesel in the Colorado, but I liked just about everything on the Ranger. The only thing I wasn’t totally convinced of was the 2.3 liter turbo having enough grunt to do what I would want it to do. I do believe I was wrong as the 2.3 turbo has been performing well world-wide to haul and tow with the Ranger. And at altitude you won’t lose as much power with the 2.3 turbo.

I got another (well used) vehicle to do what I needed to get done, but a Ranger would be top of my list when I give that vehicle to my son when he’s ready to drive.
 
Mtns2Skies said:
Well my current 2010 Platinum F150 is starting to show it's age, It's got 160,000 miles on it, but has never had issues until now. Albeit relatively minor, it is definitely getting older. Fuel sender is starting to go bad, I have reasons to believe the VVT sensor is going bad, moonroof track broke, the power folding running boards broke long ago and it needs new tires. I thought I might want to start looking around at other vehicles while my truck still has some value and before I have to start putting a substantial amount of money into it. It's also got the dinosaur of an engine with the 5.4L Triton V8 Modular engine. It was the very last year this engine was put into an F150 and something more modern would be nice.

The truth of the matter is, this vehicle has never towed a trailer in its life (Purchased from my parents) and I don't forsee needing to do this except once in a blue moon. That being said, I would like something that can tow if necessary, but more importantly having a truck bed is incredibly useful, but my F150 is big and burly and can be a problem around some parts of town. More importantly for me is off-roadability, as that really is something I do on an amateur level. Additionally, the 2010 F150 does not have an option for keeping an open rear-diff when 4High is selected which makes it a pain for highway driving with snow. I generally like to keep speeds below about 50mph with the diff lock on, but sometimes patchy interstates call for more speed than that, but 2 wheel drive doesn't offer the same control as 4 wheel drive.

I've been following the development of the Ford Ranger for quite some time and Ford offered a deal while I was at the Chicago auto show to test-drive a vehicle and receive $50, so I thought I might as well check it out.

I guess marketing works, because I tried a 2019 Ranger and I absolutely fell in love. If I had to design a truck that perfectly fits my needs... this would be it. The only downside I was able to see was the relatively small fuel tank of 18gal. It drove very nicely, has a setting for 4H as well as an option to lock the diff independently of what wheel drive you're in. I took it on some rougher roads during the drive and the suspension felt advanced and responsive. The engine had plenty of power and gobs of low-end torque with that spritely 4-cyl 2.3L ecoboost.

Some of the things I love most about the Ranger are the things it doesn't have. It doesn't have a damped tailgate with a step or a split or anything to make it heavy and expensive. It's a simple tailgate that's been around for 100 years, and I like that, though the tailgate does lock with the rest of the vehicle. It has a bed light, 110V outlets, no moonroof which has given me a lot of headache in my current vehicle. It has good fuel economy, it's nimble on the road. It has a pretty unbelievable "crawl control" mode that is auto-pilot for off-road driving, it allows you up to 20mph and the brain of the computer can get you up some pretty serious terrain.

I definitely see a Ford Ranger sometime in my near future. Now most dealerships don't have very many Rangers yet as they're new off the assembly line in the US, and this dealership only had one and it wasn't one I'd be interested in. So there's one I am interested in coming in mid April which is perfect as I'm currently working to switch jobs to a place more local to me and wouldn't want to get a new vehicle before then.

I'm not just a "Ford guy" to be a Ford guy, I don't have brand loyalty, but it just so happens that I really do like Fords products best, but if a competitor came out with something better I'd jump ship pretty readily. I'll go into why I'm not such a fan of the competitor's midsize vehicles.

Honda Ridgeline: No off-roadability, and well, look at it.

Chevy Colorado: This would be my second choice, but it's a heavier vehicle, I don't like Chevy's interiors at all and the package I would want (the Bison) would cost about 15k more. Visibility is also pretty rough. The one thing I love is the option for a Diesel engine, but not quite enough for me to go this direction.

Toyota Tacoma: It's just an outdated vehicle, it's still rocking drum brakes in the rear, a birfield joint and an antiquated drive train. The cosmetic hood scoop just kills me too... I hate cosmetic venting and scoops on vehicles. All that being said, they do come in manual which is a very nice feature for me and best in-class articulation for off-road. They also have a crawl-control mode, but it's limited to 5mph and is a bit more dated. While the Tacoma is one hell of a truck, I just have a hard time spending what Toyota wants for a vehicle with such outdated design characteristics.

Nissan Frontier: Well, it hasn't been updated since 2004, but for some reason people still buy it. Not a bad truck, just ancient and with terrible fuel economy. They are cheap though, but again lacking too many modern amenities that are just standard now.

Jeep Gladiator: Not yet out, probably going to be quite expensive and that Wrangler platform just lacks some of the niceties for the grocery getting that I'll be doing 95% of the time.

YMMV, but I sure thought the Ranger was exactly what I was looking for.
View attachment 71981
Click to expand...

Good truck. I used to have one. It was one of the ones they put Mazda decals and medallions on. They sold for about $1500 less than the ones they put Ford decals and medallions on. Same truck that went down the same assembly line. Still they didn't sell well enough because Ford sounded cooler than Mazda. They quit selling them as Mazda's a few years ago.
 
$23K would be the basic truck. Same engine in all models, XL, XLT, Titanium. 2x4, 4x4.
I looked at an XLT 2x a few weeks back. Sticker was 32K, adding 4WD would add about $4K.

I priced online how I would want it configured, close to $40K. But an F-150 or Tundra would easily be $50K-$55K.

My current ride, a 2007 Tundra, 2WD, 155+K miles.
 
Mtns2Skies said:
Well my current 2010 Platinum F150 is starting to show it's age, It's got 160,000 miles on it, but has never had issues until now. Albeit relatively minor, it is definitely getting older. Fuel sender is starting to go bad, I have reasons to believe the VVT sensor is going bad, moonroof track broke, the power folding running boards broke long ago and it needs new tires. (...)
Click to expand...
Holy cow. And this is Ford's flagship vehicle that they are supposed to be good at making. My 2010 Wrangler Rubicon was completely perfect when I sold it 2 months ago with 130k miles.
 
genna said:
I’m not looking for a truck, but new Ranger lost me at auto transmission

I used to have a Ranger beater
Click to expand...

Inam still enjoying my Ranger beater, '04 with 150,000.

Two things bother me about all new trucks: automatic and turbo. I don't wantneither! So I will continue to enjoy my aging Ranger for a few more years.

Sadly, though, manual transmissions are getting as rare as hen's teeth in this country . . . .
 
The Ranger hasn't been getting very good reviews from car mags but then again I don't usually agree with their findings either. My only gripe with the Ranger is it's pretty dated already and there will not be as many incentives as it should have being new to the US. The GM twins interior feels well put together but even more dated than the Ranger. The 3.6 is hella stout but the best I could do in one was about 20 mpg. I too like the diesel but it's just too expensive. You can't really go wrong with any of them as the Frontier will save you almost 10k if you can put up with how old it is. With incentives on full size trucks being what they are, and the fact that they are sooo much better I just couldn't spend my money on a midsize.

When cross shopping just remember an Extended cab full size has about the same leg room as a crew cab mid size. Back when I was shopping trucks you could get an F-150 ext. cab SB with the 2.7 4x4 in the sport trim for 31k with incentives. I doubt you will find a CC 4x4 Ranger for that.

A quick search in my area brought up several F150 XL and XLT trims that were less than a comparable Ranger.

Cheapest F150 with the most desirable options
https://www.cars.com/vehicledetail/detail/747794562/overview/

Cheapest Ranger with similar options
https://www.cars.com/vehicledetail/detail/763547400/overview/
 
zaitcev said:
Holy cow. And this is Ford's flagship vehicle that they are supposed to be good at making. My 2010 Wrangler Rubicon was completely perfect when I sold it 2 months ago with 130k miles.
Click to expand...
It's by far the best vehicle I've ever owned. In fairness most of the broken things are luxury items (moonroof, power running boards) and items I would not have elected to purchase, but rather it was my dad that chose those. The fuel sender still works (for now) but it thinks "full" is at the 3/4 mark. The VVT Sensor just shows itself with an ever so slight rough idle. Overall really not bad for the mileage it has.

The Volvo I used to have more or less had its transmission blow up at 75k miles. Multiple multiple other components started breaking around 100k, even the shift knob broke... that car was a real POS.


Grum.Man said:
The Ranger hasn't been getting very good reviews from car mags but then again I don't usually agree with their findings either.
Click to expand...
Yeah I saw this as well. Edmunds certainly didn't like the Ranger, though Doug DeMuro rather liked it. Do you watch TFL Truck on youtube? They REALLY put the vehicle through its paces and those guys seemed to love the Ranger, more than any midsize truck. I watch them pretty routinely, even before the Ranger, so I really trust their input.
Grum.Man said:
With incentives on full size trucks being what they are, and the fact that they are sooo much better I just couldn't spend my money on a midsize.
Click to expand...
I'd disagree that they're "soo much better" Yeah they can tow more, but that's really about it. The Ranger is more comfortable to drive around town, a much better off-road vehicle and has better fuel economy... Not to mention I don't tow.
Grum.Man said:
When cross shopping just remember an Extended cab full size has about the same leg room as a crew cab mid size. Back when I was shopping trucks you could get an F-150 ext. cab SB with the 2.7 4x4 in the sport trim for 31k with incentives. I doubt you will find a CC 4x4 Ranger for that.

A quick search in my area brought up several F150 XL and XLT trims that were less than a comparable Ranger.

Cheapest F150 with the most desirable options
https://www.cars.com/vehicledetail/detail/747794562/overview/

Cheapest Ranger with similar options
https://www.cars.com/vehicledetail/detail/763547400/overview/
Click to expand...
I'd argue that the 3.5L ecoboost is more equivalent power/weight ratio to the Ranger than the 2.7L ecoboost. On top of that the packages I want (fully loaded Lariat) don't really compare in price to the F150s. It seems like the best deals on the Ranger are either bare bones base, or go all out on it.
 
Mtns2Skies said:
It's by far the best vehicle I've ever owned. In fairness most of the broken things are luxury items (moonroof, power running boards) and items I would not have elected to purchase, but rather it was my dad that chose those. The fuel sender still works (for now) but it thinks "full" is at the 3/4 mark. The VVT Sensor just shows itself with an ever so slight rough idle. Overall really not bad for the mileage it has.

The Volvo I used to have more or less had its transmission blow up at 75k miles. Multiple multiple other components started breaking around 100k, even the shift knob broke... that car was a real POS.



Yeah I saw this as well. Edmunds certainly didn't like the Ranger, though Doug DeMuro rather liked it. Do you watch TFL Truck on youtube? They REALLY put the vehicle through its paces and those guys seemed to love the Ranger, more than any midsize truck. I watch them pretty routinely, even before the Ranger, so I really trust their input.

I'd disagree that they're "soo much better" Yeah they can tow more, but that's really about it. The Ranger is more comfortable to drive around town, a much better off-road vehicle and has better fuel economy... Not to mention I don't tow.

I'd argue that the 3.5L ecoboost is more equivalent power/weight ratio to the Ranger than the 2.7L ecoboost. On top of that the packages I want (fully loaded Lariat) don't really compare in price to the F150s. It seems like the best deals on the Ranger are either bare bones base, or go all out on it.
Click to expand...

Go drive a 2.7 before you put it down. And I will stick to my soo much better remark. The big 3 put all their efforts into building the full size trucks. As of right now the midsize trucks are still just market feelers. The full size trucks have much more room, ride better, better power trains, and almost as good fuel economy.

And yes I watch TFL but really they hardly ever have anything bad to say about anything. You might also look at the new Ram trucks. They are starting to get some pretty heavy incentives and seem to be a great truck.
 
I have a 2011 XLT with 49k miles in great condition. After seeing Ford was bringing the Ranger back I thought it would be perfect for me. Then I looked at it. yuck
 
FlySince9 said:
I could be wrong but pretty sure the Bronco doesn’t have a 4-door option...
Click to expand...

I read something recently about it being brought back, and with 4 doors.

As far as the Ranger goes, I like it. I've owned several in the past. No power and gas hogs, but they were the right size for me. But the new Rangers aren't your father's Rangers. These are updated, more power, better fuel economy, more comfort...well, better in every way.

I'm still driving my old GMC Canyon and while I'd like a new one I just can't forgive GM for the passlock debacle. (yes, I finally cut the wire) So yeah, I'd lean toward a new Ranger.
 
zaitcev said:
Holy cow. And this is Ford's flagship vehicle that they are supposed to be good at making. My 2010 Wrangler Rubicon was completely perfect when I sold it 2 months ago with 130k miles.
Click to expand...

As Mtn2Skies mentioned, almost every item he listed was a non-essential item. He could fix almost every issue on the truck for around $1K. The VVT sensor is about the only item that would be a bigger issue to deal with, but it's not particularly difficult to fix, just involved removing the valve cover (if I recall correctly). The moonroof/retractable running boards are easy fixes. Hell, I'd just disable the power running boards or swap them for some non-retractable versions.

I have an '08 F-150 with the 5.4L and 146K miles and it has been dead-reliable, including my moonroof, lol. I do need to fix an exhaust manifold leak, but it's not expensive and is the only real "repair" I've ever had to do. I wouldn't exactly be crowing about a 130K Wrangler. It's not as if that's some really high-mileage mark. If it were 200K with not a single repair, I'd be more impressed. Stuff wears out as the miles rack up, even on Hondas and Toyotas.
 
I want a truck, not a higher-riding car with an open trunk. Need four doors? Get a car. Or a minivan. I keep hearing rumbles that station wagons are coming back . . .

No interest at all in any motor vehicle with an automatic transmission [except the hydrostatic tranny in my riding mower]. The last one I had, an Infiniti, was frequently not in the gear that I wanted it to be in. Sure, it's easy to make it downshift, but I haven't found a way to make one upshift. Although the manual shift option available on some is nice, it's an option and not universally available; some of them default back to full automatic 20-30 seconds after your last shift.

Autos are fine if you want to clunk it into "D" and steer your way leisurely down the road. I like to drive my vehicles, and make it do what I want to do. Going and doing what the vehicle wants??? No thank you . . . . . Keep your "better" transmission, I'll keep shopping the list of those that have what I want to pay for and use. My definition of "better" is obviously different than yours, as your "better" is a "swing and a miss" to me.
 
Juliet Hotel said:
Because automatics are better.
Click to expand...

As @Hank S said, he and I have different(from what appears to be the rest of the country's) definition of better. But, I have almost never heard of an MT transmission failure driving it within parameters on a street. ATs.... well.. they seem to be causes for constant reliability issues and ultimately kill cars in the end as cost of replacement exceeds value of the car. And before you say "clutch replacement", that's an easy job that needs to be done once, maybe twice, in the car's typical life
 
With the exception of dual clutch or sequential gear boxes auto transmission failures seem to be a thing of the past. That's not to say they want come back or exist in certain cars but in large they are a non concern anymore. Pretty much everyone is using an Asian or ZF transmission these days. I'm torn when it comes to that choice, while most new cars tend to find the gear I prefer I am not a fan of how eager they are to shift out of overdrive. There isn't really any new development in the manual world so for that I will probably always have an auto daily driver and have a manual weekend or fun car.
 
Grum.Man said:
With the exception of dual clutch or sequential gear boxes auto transmission failures seem to be a thing of the past. That's not to say they want come back or exist in certain cars but in large they are a non concern anymore. Pretty much everyone is using an Asian or ZF transmission these days. I'm torn when it comes to that choice, while most new cars tend to find the gear I prefer I am not a fan of how eager they are to shift out of overdrive. There isn't really any new development in the manual world so for that I will probably always have an auto daily driver and have a manual weekend or fun car.
Click to expand...

Agreed. If you want to hate on modern auto transmissions for not being in the gear you prefer, or not behaving the way you want in 100% of scenarios, fine. However, claiming "reliability" just doesn't hold much water anymore. Most modern auto trannies seem to run 150K miles with no issues. Rebuilds are generally only $2-3K for most common versions. The majority of the vehicles I've driven as rentals or own have paddle shifters or another mechanism to allow you to manually select the gearing if you so choose, trucks often being one of the exceptions. I love to row the gears in a sports car, and I understand the feel/connection to it. However, I won't pretend that I would generate any meaningful savings over the life of a car by having a manual transmission vs an auto. The 8/10-speed transmissions also seem to provide better performance and fuel mileage in most situations because of having a more CVT-like range of ratios with which to select.
 
Grum.Man said:
With the exception of dual clutch or sequential gear boxes auto transmission failures seem to be a thing of the past. That's not to say they want come back or exist in certain cars but in large they are a non concern anymore. Pretty much everyone is using an Asian or ZF transmission these days. I'm torn when it comes to that choice, while most new cars tend to find the gear I prefer I am not a fan of how eager they are to shift out of overdrive. There isn't really any new development in the manual world so for that I will probably always have an auto daily driver and have a manual weekend or fun car.
Click to expand...

your assertion *may be* is true for proven 4-5 speed autos most of the time(see Honda Odyssey), but that's not what is put in cars now. DCT, 10 speed AT, CVTs are all new and unproven in a long term.

Just google auto transmission failures and see what comes out. Here are some for F150:
http://www.carproblemzoo.com/ford/f-150/transmission-failure-problems.php

Also, 150K miles in a modern car is nothing. I want my transmission to last at least as long as the engine does and that's a lot more that 150K miles. Like i said, ATs kill cars.
 
My police department uses nothing but Fords...and we have nothing but problems. I have no horse in this race, but although I once would have considered a Ford, I've scratched them off my recent list when I go looking for a new truck next year...I like the exterior look of them, but they have been an unbelievable pain in the arse.
My own department-provided ride is a brand new Ford Explorer that I've had for 3 weeks now...with such a truck, I "should" be happy (well, I guess I am happy I get a free-to-me vehicle to use), but what a piece of crud. Radio is a complete pain to use (it scans through the whole band without stopping on a single station, yet I can tune in stations just fine; to preset a station takes like ten button pushes; the blue tooth audio doesn't stop when phone calls come in), heater barely works and blows the hot air under your seat, so your feet are always freezing. It came with a 16 gallon gas tank but gets 17 mpg (with my drive, I must get gas every two days). Turning off the traction control seems to do absolutely nothing. Glove box won't stay closed. Backup camera warns me of objects that are not there. Sounds powerful, but goes no where fast (so noisy engine ≠ fast vehicle). Good luck with the Ford blue tooth...I've been messing with it for the past 3 weeks, and still haven't completely figured it out. I've twice now had issues with the high beams not working. Steering is too tight and the vehicle seems unstable. My butt can't tell the difference between the Explorer seat and a piece of plywood.
My previous vehicle was a 2017 Ford Edge...also nothing but problems. The bureau had three of the Edges, and all three have been in the shop more than out: continuous brake issues, transmission issues, interior plastic falling apart in your hands, tailgates won't stay closed, repeated engine codes, repeated recalls, etc. I know police department use = extreme service, but detective bureau use is normally not all that tough.
 
Many times ATs die an early death because people never service them. My Dad was a "no service" kind of guy. He had the oil changed once or twice a year, and that was it. Air filters? Coolant? Fuel filter? Tranny fluid and filter? He never changed any of that stuff, but always complained when the auto transmissions crapped out at 100kmi. Every time!
 
I believe my next car will be a model A ford. Think about it. what can't you fix at home?
 
Bill Jennings said:
Many times ATs die an early death because people never service them. My Dad was a "no service" kind of guy. He had the oil changed once or twice a year, and that was it. Air filters? Coolant? Fuel filter? Tranny fluid and filter? He never changed any of that stuff, but always complained when the auto transmissions crapped out at 100kmi. Every time!
Click to expand...

That is true. And ATs typically need more service(more often and more expensive). It is also true that they often die right after servicing(if it hasn't been done often enough). Some manufactures(BMW) advertised sealed(no service) auto transmissions for a while.

They are simply more sensitive to heat, bad service record and have a lot of intricate components that can fail. MTs are dirt simple.
 
genna said:
your assertion *may be* is true for proven 4-5 speed autos most of the time(see Honda Odyssey), but that's not what is put in cars now. DCT, 10 speed AT, CVTs are all new and unproven in a long term.

Just google auto transmission failures and see what comes out. Here are some for F150:
http://www.carproblemzoo.com/ford/f-150/transmission-failure-problems.php

Also, 150K miles in a modern car is nothing. I want my transmission to last at least as long as the engine does and that's a lot more that 150K miles. Like i said, ATs kill cars.
Click to expand...
42 problems out of millions of F150 pickups is a killer to you? I have seen my fare share of manual failures too over the years. Worn synchronizes, bearing failures, input shaft failures. You may not hear about them as much any more because there just aren't many on the road.
 
Grum.Man said:
42 problems out of millions of F150 pickups is a killer to you? I have seen my fare share of manual failures too over the years. Worn synchronizes, bearing failures, input shaft failures. You may not hear about them as much any more because there just aren't many on the road.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure this is a small sample of common problems. only about 1000 powertrain failures in there. I guess i could have picked a better example.

Synchros are typically worst offenders in MTs. I did have one fail on me(user error), but that's a single failure with over 1/2 mil miles on them. Including learning, teaching, and track use. I stand by my assertion that generally MTs are more proven and reliable.
 
SoonerAviator said:
Agreed. If you want to hate on modern auto transmissions for not being in the gear you prefer, or not behaving the way you want in 100% of scenarios, fine.
Click to expand...
I get the not being the gear the driver prefers complaint often when I'm putting a truck driver into an automatic truck for the first time. 'I hate those things, they're never in the right gear...' Yeah, you know why? Because you're driving in the wrong gear. Every time I take on of those 'autos are always in the wrong gear' type drivers and put him in an automatic, he fuel consumption goes from 5.6mpg to 7mpg. So the truck is in the wrong gear but now it suddenly gets 1.5mpg better fuel economy. Hmmm.....
 
genna said:
I'm pretty sure this is a small sample of common problems. only about 1000 powertrain failures in there. I guess i could have picked a better example.

Synchros are typically worst offenders in MTs. I did have one fail on me(user error), but that's a single failure with over 1/2 mil miles on them. Including learning, teaching, and track use. I stand by my assertion that generally MTs are more proven and reliable.
Click to expand...
Actually, since automatics far outnumber MT, you'd need to normalize that data to compare it. I've never had an issue with any automobile transmission (including eleven with MTs, one in a diesel truck) with most of my cars going over 150K miles. I know a couple of "digital drivers", whose on/off hammering of the throttle has killed more than one AT.
 
tawood said:
My police department uses nothing but Fords...and we have nothing but problems. I have no horse in this race, but although I once would have considered a Ford, I've scratched them off my recent list when I go looking for a new truck next year...I like the exterior look of them, but they have been an unbelievable pain in the arse.
My own department-provided ride is a brand new Ford Explorer that I've had for 3 weeks now...with such a truck, I "should" be happy (well, I guess I am happy I get a free-to-me vehicle to use), but what a piece of crud. Radio is a complete pain to use (it scans through the whole band without stopping on a single station, yet I can tune in stations just fine; to preset a station takes like ten button pushes; the blue tooth audio doesn't stop when phone calls come in), heater barely works and blows the hot air under your seat, so your feet are always freezing. It came with a 16 gallon gas tank but gets 17 mpg (with my drive, I must get gas every two days). Turning off the traction control seems to do absolutely nothing. Glove box won't stay closed. Backup camera warns me of objects that are not there. Sounds powerful, but goes no where fast (so noisy engine ≠ fast vehicle). Good luck with the Ford blue tooth...I've been messing with it for the past 3 weeks, and still haven't completely figured it out. I've twice now had issues with the high beams not working. Steering is too tight and the vehicle seems unstable. My butt can't tell the difference between the Explorer seat and a piece of plywood.
My previous vehicle was a 2017 Ford Edge...also nothing but problems. The bureau had three of the Edges, and all three have been in the shop more than out: continuous brake issues, transmission issues, interior plastic falling apart in your hands, tailgates won't stay closed, repeated engine codes, repeated recalls, etc. I know police department use = extreme service, but detective bureau use is normally not all that tough.
Click to expand...

I can appreciate that POV, however, I will supplant that with my own anecdotal evidence from police/emergency staff family and friends that everyone thinks the models they have are mechanically inferior. Doesn't matter whether it's Dodge, GM, or Ford, police officers will ride them hard, put 'em away wet, then complain when stuff is broken on them. LEOs aren't particularly cautious with the vehicles, and have no problem doing repeated hard launches and running over potholes/curbs with little concern for the vehicle. The Explorer and Taurus have a pretty good reputation in other fleet applications, where they don't seem to have the same reputation as LEO units do. Same goes for the Chargers/Malibus/etc. The other aspect of many problems I've seen/heard from LEO units is they often have their own shop/garage to work on repairs/custom installations (radios/lights/etc.) which lead to poor wiring and malfunctioning equipment. When some lackey starts tapping into power/ground wires and relays to power aux equipment, it starts wreaking havoc on the factory installed components. Not every department is like that, but it's certainly common from what I've seen. Just like the Marines, if you give 'em a ball bearing, they'll find a way to break it or lose it!
 
genna said:
This may be a bit better : https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/ford-recalls-f-150-transmissions-and-more/

;)
Click to expand...

Key point: "Ford has five accident reports that might be related to this problem. The automaker also received one report of "whiplash," which likely occurred when the vehicle lurched forward during the downshift. Thankfully, all it takes to remedy the issue is applying a software update to the powertrain control module, which Ford will handle at dealers.

Out of approx: 2-3 MILLION F-series trucks sold during that time period, not including the Navigator/Expedition which were basically identical with engine/tranny. Pardon me while I disregard a software flash remedy for a handful of recorded incidents.
 
SoonerAviator said:
Key point: "Ford has five accident reports that might be related to this problem. The automaker also received one report of "whiplash," which likely occurred when the vehicle lurched forward during the downshift. Thankfully, all it takes to remedy the issue is applying a software update to the powertrain control module, which Ford will handle at dealers.

Out of approx: 2-3 MILLION F-series trucks sold during that time period, not including the Navigator/Expedition which were basically identical with engine/tranny. Pardon me while I disregard a software flash remedy for a handful of recorded incidents.
Click to expand...


I'm not sure what your point here is. Not enough accidents yet? they are recalling over a million F150s due to this issue before more accidents happen. I assure you that Ford wouldn't be spending millions on this recall if they or NTSB(if it was ordered) didn't think it was important. The fact that it's a relatively simple fix doesn't negate the fact that this problem can only occur in a "reliable" automatic transmission.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top