Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Ford Ranger Discussions' started by Administrator, Oct 19, 2018.
I get it to about $42,620 on the Ford website with about the same options and packages.
I've got a lariat with just about every thing except running boards for 42310 but it's s cab
This guy is entertaining but lays it on a little thick. Doesn't miss an opportunity to throw the competition under the bus.
I really like these guys but instead of acting surprised about their MPG numbers perhaps it would be good for them to provide some perspective. A fresh new engine rarely gets the same mileage numbers as one that has 5,000+ miles on it. Vehicle manufacturers provide test vehicles with fully broken-in engines for EPA testing to reflect more accurate mileage for the life-span of the truck. That’s the difference in mileage they are seeing. But they act surprised when every new (near 0 mile) truck they drive never reaches the EPA numbers in their “real-world” testing.
I agree they could provide more background or details; however FWIW I believe there is a shot of the odometer showing a couple thousand on it when they take delivery.
Keep in mind there guys don't spare the pedal and spend a lot of time driving up and down various grades, often at high elevation. I'm guessing thier results will vary from what I'll see in FL. Basically, YMMV.
This guy is really full of it. He got numerous facts wrong that I picked up on, including the power rear window. He also wrongly called out the competition several times with specs and features that are in fact available on the competition. Additionally, $42,500 for that truck in my opinion is exuberant. I can see $38,000 MSRP the way it is configured - doesn't even have leather seats, soft touch interior, or LED interior/front on XLT... From what I've seen, this truck will likely sell for $40,000 right now, that could buy, at least for prices in my area, $50,000-$52,000 MSRP worth of F-150 with a lot more capability.
They also spent some time in 4WD at MOAB which in my experience just kills mileage. My guess is that they kicked in the turbo frequently. They even alluded to that (we passed a lot of people). Even so, that doesn't seem to be too bad for a mix of highway/city driving along with some 4 wheeling. 21 MPG overall for the 1100 mile trip.
They also drove in LA traffic, city streets in Vegas, off-roading, and from sea level to over 11,000 ft in elevation. 21 mpg is not that bad.
I even like these guys but they should say at the end weather the gas mileage was for the whole trip or not. And 4 wheel high in that bit of snow?? Give me a break!! Please!!
Thos guys are ok in small doses. . not 25 straight minutes worth though.
almost 21 overall mpg is great for what they were doing.
And, think about the pieces these guys do.. they wouldn't want to shoot their best mpg wad until they can do a GM twins, Tacoma, Ranger shootout.
I've noticed on a few other vehicles as well. As the different between driving 60 MPH and <70 MPH can affect fuel economy by as much as 2 MPH. They also had 2 full sized guys in the truck along with gear. throw elevation and a heavy passing foot all has a effect on it. But you can probably see 21 mpg being a somewhat "worst" case scenario.
My 05 Ranger 3.0L 2wd gets 24 highway below 65 mph. At 70 it's 19, go as fast as you can afford.
I chalk up the mileage to being a new motor, and some of there driving. Everyone says the EcoBoosts get better after broken in. Which I cab say is true from my focus ST I had.
I've made the LA to Vegas trip a ton of times. Including had a rental F-150 crew fx4 with 4 people. Truck the EcoBoosts 3.5 and got around 20 mpg. So the Ranger will for sure do better.