• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Compact pickups

mmntech

mmntech

Lifer
Now that I've turned 25 and wont get as hosed on insurance, I think its time I bought my own vehicle that's actually in my name.

I've been considering a few options. A compact pickup is one. I tend to haul more stuff than take passengers in my current car. I figure it would be great for my RC stuff, or if I ever need to pick something up from Ikea, etc.

I was considering the Ford Ranger. The 4x2 four banger with the extended cab. The truck hasn't changed in years and its pretty darn cheap for what it is. Fuel efficient too. Anybody have any experience with these? I'm interested in the cost of ownership over it's lifetime as well as how it handles. Ive driven plenty of pickups (F-150s, F-450s, RAMs, Silverados) but never one this small.

The other option is the Mazda B, which is supposedly just a rebranded Ranger.

The third option is a compact 4cyl SUV. These are more expensive so it would need to be used. Something along the lines of a CRV or Grand Vitara. Though fuel efficiency usually isn't spectacular with these, especially the Vitara.

Any suggestions, tips? Looking to spend a maximum of $20,0000 CAD for a new vehicle, less is better. Or low milage used as long as its still in warranty.
 
I've got an 06 ranger 4-banger. Gets the job done, wish I had the extended cab but didn't see any used on the lots when I was looking. Was getting around 26-28 mpg when I was doing a lot of highway driving and stopped going 85mph.

Cost of ownership so far - oil changes and I had to replace the knob that turns my headlights on.
 
If you want a cheap, frugal, and reliable little utility vehicle the Ranger is very tough to beat. Our family had two of them that went close to 420,000 between them with fairly minimal drama. Both were 2WD 4 bangers The '85 was carburated and that needed rebuilt a few times. The '92 was an auto and the transmission needed rebuilt around 150,000 miles. Outside of that, gas, tires, and oil 🙂

Not sure what you are looking for in "handling". It's little budget truck. It handles and drives like...well...a budget truck.
 
vi edit said:
If you want a cheap, frugal, and reliable little utility vehicle the Ranger is very tough to beat. Our family had two of them that went close to 420,000 between them with fairly minimal drama. Both were 2WD 4 bangers The '85 was carburated and that needed rebuilt a few times. The '92 was an auto and the transmission needed rebuilt around 150,000 miles. Outside of that, gas, tires, and oil 🙂

Not sure what you are looking for in "handling". It's little budget truck. It handles and drives like...well...a budget truck.
Click to expand...

I'm used to driving medium duty trucks. I'm guessing performance and handling is somewhere between a small SUV and full size pickup.

Looks like the Rangers come with traction control now. Not bad.
 
I bought my 97 V6 ranger new, and its still a great truck. Blew a head gasket somehow, but other than that all good. Can run loads of over a ton to the dump with little fuss.

Also check out the Nissan Frontier, they do not suck and should be readily available as well.
 
my old shop truck was a late 90s ranger 4 banger. sucker went forever and was abused for most of its life. it handled like shit for the most part, was scary to drive at 80mph on the freeway. but got pretty good mileage most of the time, changed the clutch once in the 230k miles my shop dumped on it. we ended up selling it to an employee, she bought it for her dad to tool around a reservation in. its still running last i heard.

we have a colorado in the shop now, pretty peppy on hills for the most part, but its probably the most uncomfy ride ive ever had. i hate having to use that truck for long drives.
 
Rangers went through a revision around 02-04 I think, the 4 banger has a variant of the focus 4-banger engine. When I was looking I considered the other light duty trucks but nothing could touch the mpg of the ranger 4 banger. If I went with a v6 I'd probably just move up to an F150. The engine has some pep to it to, but if you want it to move you have to get some rpm's into it. Normal driving around I just stay in the bottom of the 2k-3k rpm range, if I want to be an idiot I let it whine and it moves pretty good.

When I bought it I picked it up by myself and took a tow bar with me and towed my old car(72 VW beetle) back home with me. I've had a motorcycle in the bed with another on the trailer behind it, and as this is my first year as a homeowner the bed of the truck is pretty regularly full with stuff, my brother with a RAM 4x4 v8 likes to joke on it, but it is all the truck I need.
 
I've got a 98 w/ the 2.5l lima 4 cyl as a beater truck and it's been great. I love that thing, actually.

The lima motors are incredibly robust.. They use them in snowcats and the like, it's not unusual to see 4 cyl rangers with a half million miles or more. I've had a couple of small issues, the sorta stuff you'll have with any 10+ year old vehicle (broken wiring harness at DPFE sensor, some minor EGR issues)

The only problem is that they're dog slow. As in, if you live in an area with lots of traffic you have to plan your lane changes etc way ahead. I've towed a stupid amount of stuff with 0 issues - from a full pallet of sod (~1800lbs) to 3 sportbikes (1 in bed, 2 in trailer + gear for trackday) with no problems. It's sorta weird because it doesn't seem to have much trouble hauling around so much weight... i.e. they're slow when empty, slow when full.




If I could go back I would've probably gotten a V6, even though I feel like they're much less reliable the 4 cyl lima just doesn't have enough power for day-to-day stuff. The new 4cyl is supposed to have more power, but is less reliable so you might as well get the V6 unless you need a gas sipper.


Edit:

$20k? Skip the ranger. It's a good cheap beater truck but the new stuff is better nowadays
 
Last edited:
I have a Mazda "Ranger" B4000. Other then a little body parts its the same.

If you get one I would skip the 3L V6 and either get a 4cyl or the 4L V6.

Gas milage in the V6 is not great compared to a car. So if not towing/hauling a lot then the 4cyl would work much better.

I like my "ranger" but if I had the money I would get a Canyon/Colorado. Just a hair bigger but nicer IMO. So look at those as well depending on your budget.
 
I have an old 94 Mazda B4000. 4.0L V6 4x4. First truck I've owned, would never not own a truck. I love it. Highly maneuverable and rock solid so far with 120K miles on it.
 
hanoverphist said:
my old shop truck was a late 90s ranger 4 banger. sucker went forever and was abused for most of its life. it handled like shit for the most part, was scary to drive at 80mph on the freeway. but got pretty good mileage most of the time, changed the clutch once in the 230k miles my shop dumped on it. we ended up selling it to an employee, she bought it for her dad to tool around a reservation in. its still running last i heard.

we have a colorado in the shop now, pretty peppy on hills for the most part, but its probably the most uncomfy ride ive ever had. i hate having to use that truck for long drives.
Click to expand...

I had a rental Canyon and it had a great ride.
 
My dad drove a 92 Ranger with the 3.0L V6 with a 5spd that made it's way to me and finally my brother before we sold it. I think it had around 200K miles when my brother finally got rid of it. Good little pickup. It had some suspension issues at around 150K, but other than that it was pretty trouble free.
 
My grandfather, after selling his camper/2500, is going to get a Canyon he says. V8, extended cab, 4wd, mentioned they get 20 or so mpg (20-24 I think he said). That would sound good to me.
 
Colorado offers three engine choices:
Vortec 2.9L I-4 engine
The standard Vortec 2.9L I-4 engine offers 185 hp. 2WD models offer an impressive 25 MPG(5) on the highway.

Vortec 3.7L I-5 engine
The in-line configuration in the available Vortec 3.7L I-5 engine gives it the efficiency to offer 23 MPG hwy.(5) on 2WD models. It also pumps out 242 hp and 242 lb.-ft. of torque.
Vortec 5.3L V8 engine

The available Vortec 5.3L V8 engine cranks out 300 hp. All that power and it offers better highway fuel economy - 20 MPG highway - than Dodge Dakota V8(6).

http://www.chevrolet.com/colorado/
 
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/byclass.htm

4 cyl 2wd -

ford ranger 4 cyl manual 22/27
"" auto 19/24

Toy tacoma 4 cyl manual 20/26
"" auto 19/25

nissan frontier manual 19/23
"" auto 17/22

chevy colorado/canyon manual and auto 18/25



or

v8 2wd
F150 15/21
v6 2wd
Ranger 15/21

chevy silverado v8 15/21
colorado v8 15/20 auto


and then I got tired of typing the numbers over here. I never understood going with anything but the 4 cylinder in the light trucks, unless you just really like the smaller footprint/feel. Once you go up to even a v6 you end up in the same mpg range as a full size v8 which the brands generally pay more attention to and have more options and refinement.
 
Tristicus said:
4x4 Extended cab with a V8 and Z71 package with a few options prices out to $31,210. Not bad.
Click to expand...

I guess at that point I'd rather have a full size with the same options.

*shrug*

Midsize trucks are way too freaking expensive.
 
FWIW, my '91 S10 had over 300k when it was done. The body was pretty much shot, but everything else was solid up until the engine finally died. The only major thing that I ever had to replace on it was the clutch at 180k. I got it with about 80k on it, so I'm not sure if the previous owner did any work to it.

Whether the newer S10's are as reliable, I'm not sure. My dad has an '01 (I think) S10 and it's been pretty good to him so far.
 
FWIW, my '91 S10 had over 300k when it was done. The body was pretty much shot, but everything else was solid up until the engine finally died. The only major thing that I ever had to replace on it was the clutch at 180k. I got it with about 80k on it, so I'm not sure if the previous owner did any work to it.

Whether the newer S10's are as reliable, I'm not sure. My dad has an '01 (I think) S10 and it's been pretty good to him so far.
Click to expand...

I had a 99 S10 Blazer that was good up to about 130k then it self destructed. In the 8 months I owned it I had to replace ball joints, pitman arm, idler arm and tie rods, once that was taken care of the radiator broke, followed by the fuel pump, water pump, and heater core, after fixing that I started having intermittent electrical problems that I just didn't feel like dealing with so I sold it.

The vehicle previously belonged to my parents, my dad apparently doesn't do maintenance on his vehicles aside from oil changes and replacing tires. I realized after having so much trouble he'd never had the chassis lubed in 125k miles, it had never had the coolant flushed, never had the fuel filter changed, it was kept clean but never waxed, the air filter may have been changed at 70k, the spark plugs were never changed... If it had been taken care of during the first 125k miles, I have no doubt the truck could have driven a lot longer.
 
Throckmorton said:
I had a rental Canyon and it had a great ride.
Click to expand...

it probably has a much better interior than the stripped down POS we were burdened with. cant even change the angle of the seat back. no center console for an arm rest. utility back, no seat at all. small ass tires (stock size) that seem to give back a ton of noise, follow every crack and report every bump hit. i wonder what the interior looks like on a rental, may make a huge difference in ride/ experience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top