Mine was dark blue, not teal
Perhaps I fibbed a bit when I said that the 1989 Dodge Omni was the only brand-new car I ever bought. On a technicality, Son of Ranger wasn’t a car, and neither was it technically brand new, although I was the first titled owner. I bought it with 6500 miles on the clock, and although the salesman insisted it was a demo, it was clear that it was really the shop’s parts runner.
I bought this truck for the same reasons I’d bought the Omni – I was sick of owning unreliable, crappy cars to the point where I was willing to take on a loan just to have something decent to drive.
I paid $9000 out the door, which included an $800 trade value for the Volvo known as Nora (the first). The truck was almost as stripped out as one could buy, including rubber floors, a vinyl bench seat, steel wheels with dog-dish hubcaps, and manual steering but power brakes. The only two options listed on the sticker were heavy-duty springs (1600 lb. payload) and (slightly) oversized tires – 205’s vs. the base 195’s.
That’s it, just a plain truck. The kind of truck people lament about no longer being available. And it was a perfectly serviceable vehicle, for both commuting and road trips. However it really wasn’t particularly good at those things. The heavy payload package made the truck really bouncy when empty. The twin-spark 2.3 liter I-4 had neither particularly good power nor particularly good fuel economy.
The truck could be made to ride a lot better with the heavy load the springs were designed for. It rode great when hauling gravel or a heavy roto-tiller I’d borrowed. Problem was, while the load smoothed the ride out, that poor 2.3 could barely get the heavily-loaded truck moving without a lot of clutch slipping.
Regular-cab compact trucks are, well, cramped. And while a good old-fashioned bench seat might seem like a good idea for date night, it really doesn’t accomplish much when there’s a big ol’ shifter in the way!
Which brings about my theory about why trucks like this are no longer sold. People who drove them said, “This thing would be great if only it had more room inside and more power.” So they bought V-6, extended-cab versions of the small trucks. And then they realized that those trucks didn’t really do anything better than a full-size truck would do, and didn’t really get better MPG anyhow. Aside from fleet buyers who weren’t ever going to drive the stripped-out Rangers they were buying for their employees, it turned out that not enough people thought compact trucks were a good idea, so these models just went away or became significantly larger.
Anyhow, I drove the Ranger for 4 years until the loan was paid off. A co-worker had just retired his old Ranger, and made me an offer I couldn’t refuse. The Ranger really cost me next to nothing to own, operate, and depreciate over the 4 years I owned it.
Besides, by the time I sold it, I really wasn’t driving it much anymore. Please come back next week to read, “Nora II, III, IV, etc – Own ALL the Volvo 240s!”
“…[I]t turned out that not enough people thought compact trucks were a good idea, so these models just went away or became significantly larger.”
Aw, git outta here with your actual observations and firsthand experience!
Really, the only time a compact pickup is desirable over a mid- or full-size is when space is at a premium, which isn’t really the case in most of the U.S., outside of the most crowded urban areas.
Also, I never knew the heavy-duty springs were available on short bed models.
When I worked as a carpenter in Charleston, SC I had an ’84 GMC High Sierra. The gas guzzling GMC was killing me so I traded it in on a little ’91 Toyota short bed. It was MUCH easier to navigate Charleston’s 18th century layout in the compact truck.
Still, a full-size pickup is a joy to drive. The little ones… just get you (and your sack of potatoes) there.
It’s true that unless the compact had a 4 cyl m/t 2wd, the fuel economy and purchase price was so close to that of full-size that many simply went large. However if the compact 4 cyl m/t really was capable of meeting the hauling requirements, the owner was rewarded with 30+ mpg vs 15mpg.
Very true. My 01 Ranger with a 2.5 and a 5 speed averaged 29 mpg. Four wheel drive and extra cabs mean extra weight. Extra weight uses extra fuel. So do wider more aggressive tires. One down side of my Ranger was merging onto the Interstate highway. Acceleration was glacial so merging often required using the four way hazard flashers to warn others that you were doing the best you can.
I had the identical pickup. Never saw north of 20mpg. Slower than molasses, hot, cramped, buckboard suspension. I will say it never ever failed to start all the way to 212,000 miles.
Do not care what the pundits are going to say, but a half ton truck should be no larger than a Ranger. Trucks that size make perfect sense, as most people barely haul a sack of potatoes with their trucks. And the cab of my ’83, has plenty of room, and I’m 6ft and 190lbs. The ’93-up Ranger feels like it has a smaller cab-and it might.
it has absolutely nothing to do with “pundits”, and everything to do with what buyers prefer. And given the choice, buyers inevitably will take more interior space over less, except maybe in a sports car or such.
I like the idea of these compact trucks, but at 6’4″, I’ve never been able to really like sitting in them very much. My biggest gripe is that the seat is too close to the floor, which doesn’t make any sense in a truck cab. My xB has much higher seats, and much more headroom, etc. They should have used a taller boxy cab; when I get into a compact ruck, I feel like I’m getting into a jacked-up sports car.
It explains why GM went to such a tall cab in their new Colorado/Canyon. I haven’t sat in one yet, but taller is always better than lower, for me at least.
I just bought a Canyon, and you do sit quite a bit lower than in a full sizer. The power seat gives pretty good elevation (no tilt though), and there is more than enough head room but if you do elevate the seat too much you will find your left knee hitting the the door arm rest and your right one banging the floor mounted shifter. I wouldn’t have bought it if I still needed to get in and out 50 or 60 times a day as your legs do kind of end up in a tunnel and it’s quite awkward to get out compared to my old Sierra
It does kind of have a jacked up sports car feel to it. I eventually found the right adjustment but the view over the hood reminds me more of my old Firebird than a truck. My petite wife on the other hand loves the seat elevation and she’s small enough not to notice the arm rest or the shifter.
It sure is a lot nicer to drive once you’re settled in than the old compacts were though.
Paul, This may make someone here at CC roll their eyes, but you would have loved my 2002 5 speed PT Cruiser.
Lots of head and leg room, power seat (up and down only), removable rear seats leaving 64 cubic feet of room, and quite a lot of torque at low-ish rpm. It cornered well, was solid with no rattles, surprised more than a few at stop light tournaments, and cruised nicely at highway speeds with low revs in 5th.
It was heavy (which probably made it so comfortable) so it was not great on gas. But it ran well for 12 years with minimal issues.
Best Chrysler product I ever owned. Admittedly, not a high bar.
No eye rolling from me! I rather liked it, most of all for the packaging. My xB just takes it one step further. 🙂
My brother had one; one day the engine just died while on a trip. it took a while for him to diagnose, as he’s a pretty good mechanic. It turned out to be a broken camshaft! Now that wouldn’t have likely happened in a Toyota.
Paul, I’m curious: what are your thoughts on the Skoda Roomster? Seems like something that might appeal to you. I find them fascinating but they were a sales dud.
As a guy that is self employed with a fire sprinkler company, a hand full of rentals, and a family, I have a little different perspective. My extended cab F150 is nearly perfect in size and capability for our uses, which often include the whole family. Anyway, there are definitely those that underutilize their rigs, but the full-sized American truck exists because it’s awesome for such a large variety of tasks…work and play.
Dad has a ’98 (which looks positively diminutive next to my ’15 RAM 2500). V6, auto, air, manual windows, power brakes, AM/FM/cassette! Less than 50K miles on it. I fit in it fine (6‘-4″), but hate driving it, as it’s underpowered and the (probably original) shocks are shot. I give it an ‘Italian tune-up’ every time I visit, as he only drives it a few miles a week (as in fewer than ten).
es
The organization I work for is situated in an urban campus with several buildings. When we retired our low mileage but heavily abused 97 Dodge Dakota short cab no option pickup last year, it was hard to find a replacement.
We were looking for something that could haul things around campus and easily climb and fit on narrow sidewalks, mount a plow during the winter to clear said sidewalks, and go no further than the Home Depot across town. For heavy duty stuff, we had an E350 Ford van and an F250 pickup.
Most of the local dealers did not understand our requirements. The models they showed us were GPS, Bluetooth, leather equipped extended cabs with power everything… They kept telling us what a great deal they could get us for these and didn’t understand why we walked away. It was either that or they offered us full sized trucks that could pull down a house but were also equipped like a premium sedan. There were a few actual work trucks available locally, but they were used, abused, low mileage examples like the 97 Dakota we had just taken out of service. We were willing to pay cash for a brand new work truck but nobody local seemed to be able to understand or deliver what we wanted. Very frustrating.
We finally had to go to a dealer out of town who specialized in work trucks.
I hear you. I wandered into a Ford showroom and was looking over the pickups as a serious buyer might and all the salesboy went on about was the Bluetooth and a bunch of other electronic infotainment garbage that I absolutely couldn’t care less about. When asked about actual TRUCK questions the kid had no clue. If I wanted that crap I would have gone to Best Buy. I suppose salesboy had never been asked such questions before, seeing as how trucks are just solo commuter/family haulers anyway. I left with such a feeling of sadness and despair over the state of humanity.
You are correct about supply and demand. After awhile, the salesmen just let us wander the back lot to look through the inventory… All the trucks they had were well equipped luxury cruisers. Not a single work truck in the lot. Any of them would be fine for personal/family use but not for what we had in mind.
It gave me a sense of what is expected/what sells in a pick up (even a simple one) these days.
We had to go outside a local dealer to a fleet specialist to get what we needed.
Fred, that is because 99% of “trucks” never do any “work” other than drive its owner around. Occasionally there is a piece of 1″X2″ lumber sticking out the back, since the beds are so short on the things.
The must be BIG cuz Americans and Canadians want BIG, and BIGGER is BETTER. Thus, we get half tons that need a ladder to mount, and a load bed so tall you need a forklift to carry anything.
And they sell and absolutely GAZILLION of the things to clock punchers who gladly pump half their paycheques into them. They are about as technically advanced as a 1949 Oldsmobile, so HUGE profits are made off the HUGE trucks.
When I was shopping for a car last year, Ford was by far the worst. Although base models are advertised on their website, they dealers do not stock them, and trying to get them to order one wasn’t something I wanted to do.
It’s the same for work trucks. The basic truck costs $25k, but the bling factor can easily double that.
“I left with such a feeling of sadness and despair over the state of humanity.”
Really? Because you had one experience with one other person about a vehicle that didn’t go as you expected?
These Rangers were damn good trucks, and in my fleet manager days I purchased a number of them. I preferred the 3.0 automatic combo which gave us little trouble and decent operating costs. The 4 cylinders we tried just didn’t save us any real money. Later 4.0 versions used as much fuel or more as an F-150, just like an S-10 with a 4.3 cost about the same to operate as a Silverado 1500. Mostly for that reason I eventually gave up on the compacts, as the only real saving was at initial purchase.
I recently decided to try again on my own vehicle, replacing a 2010 Sierra 1500 (with a 4.8 auto) with a 2016 Canyon 4×4 longbox crew. And now I’m hearing rumours that Ford may re-enter the “compact” market soon so we may see some real choice for those of us who like trucks but don’t want or need the ever-larger full size units.
Evan, You make some good points. Things creep up on you while either thinking about getting a small truck, or actually getting one and living with it.
Unless you can keep it in a parking or storage area until you really need it, the truck becomes a primary or secondary driver for someone. Cab room for many tall-ish drivers is not great in most regular cab small trucks, and sometime you might need a third seat or storage for groceries in the rain, so extra cab. 1,600 lb payload is a lot, but even regular leaf springs and a short wheel base will make for a hard ride so you get a mid-sized truck that seems more comfortable. Well, why not get a double cab if you have 2 (or more) children because you’ll need it sooner or later. Double cabs have short beds, so go for the long bed because… truck! That configuration calls for the largest V6 engine.
So, you end up with a long wheelbase nice riding, roomy double cab 18.5 foot long truck with a 6 foot bed, a little over half ton capacity, and you’re getting 16 mpg around town and 21 (max) on the interstate.
I can definitely see how that might happen.
To anyone.
When i was looking for a truck to replace my old F250 I thought about a new Ranger, this circa 2007. I looked at the base F150 which came standard with a slightly extended “access cab” with extra two little doors. The cabin was more spacious, it came with an adequate 4.2 V6 and an 8 ft. bed. The price was so close to a base Ranger there was no contest. One hundred plus thousand miles later I know I made the right choice. I average 20 mpg. at 65 mph. It will cruise at 85 mph. when I want it to. It will hit the “ton” if I floor it. It can tow pretty good on level ground but you feel it going up hills if you approach the 6,000 lbs. limit. It’s so comfortable and quiet that I really don’t need another vehicle to take trips.
The V-6 units in all the “Big 3′ half tons have plenty of power, close to 300 hp for most of them, yet go on a new car lot and most will be Ecoboost or V-8. Just try try to get a V-6 Chevrolet work truck. Great motor but special order only, and often, believe it or not, the fancier models are cheaper due to discounts.
I suspect that civilian sales of the regular cab compact pickup, like the minivan and station wagon, was yet another casualty of the SUV boom. Unless you regularly hauled smallish, grubby cargo that needed to be loaded and unloaded quickly and easily (i.e., work applications like the feature vehicle’s prior life as an auto parts runner) in urban scenarios where maneuverability played a key role, an SUV makes a lot more sense for civilian use than a compact pickup.
Even now, today’s so-called ‘compact’ pickups (they’re really more mid-size) are all either extended cab or double-cab configuration. I’m not sure anyone even offers a regular cab pickup in anything less than full-size, anymore. Seems like I recall the latest iteration of the Tacoma did away with the regular cab, and it might have been the last one.
The bottom line is that the compact regular cab pickup just became too specialized for general public consumption. It’s worth noting that the Ranger clung to life for many years with almost zero changes. It would probably still be around but I suspect that the arrival of the Transit Connect compact urban cargo van (and its competitors, the Nissan NV200 and Ram Promaster City) finally eliminated the fleet market where the majority of the last Rangers used to go.
Even now, someone mentioned the possibility of Ford re-entering the compact pickup market, now that GM has come back with the Colorado/Canyon. But you can bet that if they do, the new Ranger will not offer an entry-level, regular cab configuration which was so popular with fleets and service personnel in the past.
I suspect the extended cab will be the smallest offered if they do. Towards the end of the old Ranger’s days I usually bought extended cabs just so there was room to store lunch coolers, first aid kits, small tools etc. and still transport 2 people to the site. I doubt we’ll see rubber floor mats, wind up windows and simple work truck fittings either, though you can get (most of) that stuff on a Canyon/Colorado if you really want it.
If it’s on the Colorado, it’ll be on the upcoming Ranger, if only because Ford wants to undercut Chevy. So expect the most basic mid-size Ranger to be a SuperCab with power windows, vinyl seats, rubber floors, steel wheels, and (possibly) a rear seat delete option.
Y’all kicking around this yes/no/should/won’t compact-truck soccer ball oughtta go take a look at the current Ford Ranger offered outside the US/Canada market. And the one before that. And the one before that.
I’m aware of it, it’s a neat looking package and I’m hearing rumours that Ford may offer it in North America, at least here in Canada. It’ll be interesting to see if GM can maintain their momentum with the Canyon/Colorado if they do.
With the exception of tall or particularly nasty cargo, the commercial replacement for the Ranger, et. al. seems to be the new wave of small commercial vans, the Transit Connect, ProMaster City and NV200.
I do wish Ford, FCA, and Nissan would “pickup-ize” these vans, but those would be harder to get around the “Chicken Tax” with than the vans are.
I never understood why some fleet operators use pickups with aftermarket shells permanently attached or chassis trucks with utility beds, instead of more spacious & secure vans. Is it economics? The Border Patrol has a good excuse, as they need the ground clearance.
I’m of the belief that sometimes less is more when it comes to vehicles. My ’93 Ranger was the perfect size/package for what I used it for. It was perfect for the 3 mile round trip to work (yes, I’m blessed with this), easy to park anywhere and maneuver into tight parking spaces, and plenty big enough for any of the crap I’d load into it at Home Depot for my little weekend projects. A full size truck, however sparse, would simply have been too much truck for me. Of course I don’t need to tow anything beyond my little 14′ jon boat, but really, how many full size truck owners actually use them for towing often enough to justify a larger truck? Some for sure, but my guess would be significantly less than half. I’d like to see at least one new small truck option on the market but I won’t hold my breath.
My dad had 3 small pickups, a 94 Mazda B2300, a 2000 Toyota Tacoma, and his current a 2004 Tacoma with the (barely) extended cab. All were Fours and manuals until the latest iteration, which I suspect will be his last car. It’s an automatic with a 4.
The Mazda was the twin to the Ranger. He really liked it although it had a demanding clutch—had to be pushed ALL the way in to engage which made shifting an ordeal. On the other hand, since I took my first driving lessons on it (it also had non power brakes and steering), it really taught me some shifting, turning, and stopping skills. When he got me my 87 LTD Crown Vic, it was a breeze in comparison.
I agree with the reasons everyone above has stated these types of trucks have disappeared.
One counter-argument as to why they’re still useful…height. My dad is no longer particularly flexible but does still do the occasional dump run or bring home an antique to refinish. He can fit in and drive the big trucks fine, but doesn’t enjoy the climb up to the cab or bed. He is in his 70s, kind of frail despite being 6’3″. The little Tacoma is comfortable for him, has simple features (on par with a Grand Marquis instrument panel), and doesn’t mind getting dirty.
I guess that is an increasingly specialized niche as most folks would just buy a small SUV. Dad, however, can barely get into anything on the market. He bought the latest Tacoma used and the only other cars on the lot he could slide into were a used Grand Marquis and a new Tahoe and Suburban.
I’ve got a 2007 stripped-down Tacoma and I love it. For trips to the dump, or transporting things that are just a bit too dirty to put in the back of my Escape, it fits the bill perfectly. I bought it second-hand real cheap. It’s dependable, nimble enough, and economical. It’s not my every-day car, so it fits really nicely in the small space between the garage and fence when I’m not using it. No, I won’t be towing any yachts or transporting tons of gravel with it. But for the niche it fills, it’s the perfect vehicle.
In a perverse way, I think that’s the basic downfall of compact trucks in the U.S.: They are very desirable used vehicles, but not so much new. The buyer of a used compact truck probably isn’t looking for an all-around commuter vehicle, or else they’d buy a used car for similar money. The used small truck is for people who want something they can use to haul messy, dirty cargo. If everything’s a little faded and battered already, so much the better — you won’t feel bad about accidentally scraping the tailgate or putting a new ding in the fender while wrestling the filthy lawnmower or muddy dirt bikes into the bed. On the other hand, if you’re paying new-car money, it starts making a lot more sense to go for a lower-line full-size truck with a stereo to which you can dock your smartphone rather than sticking a cassette adapter into the tape deck. The dilemma, of course, is that the fewer people who buy them new means fewer used ones to buy and higher prices.
I think that you nailed it pretty good, in that there are not a lot of people left that want to live with a small truck as their primary personal transportation. So they want it as a second vehicle and thus just aren’t willing to buy new for an occasional use vehicle.
I had a ’96 Ranger short bed regular cab and found it a pretty good truck for my use. I mainly used it as a small car for my job as a fire code inspector. I drove it about 150 to 200 miles per day. Being a short bed it didn’t have that good a ride, but then, I don’t really expect that from a truck. Fuel economy wasn’t that great, about 23-24 MPG. It was a 6 with a five speed. Changing a clutch on that one and the ’88 I had before is a real challenge. Overall, it gave me good service for 179,000 miles. About 14,000 miles before I traded it in it developed a knock. I dropped the pan and found a beat up connecting rod bearing. I sure lucked out in that the crank and rod were not damaged. I put in a new bearing and one on the next rod and had no more trouble with it. The cab wasn’t exactly roomy even at my 5’11” height. However, we made a quick trip once to California from Indiana to pick up our daughter and bring all her stuff back. Pulling a U-Haul with 3 passengers and a bed full of furniture and household items it only struggled on one mountain pass. Since all 3 of us are kind of medium size it wasn’t all that crowded.
As I said the cab wasn’t all that roomy, but it sure made the cab of the ’99 Dakota I replaced it with seem spacious.
Bought a 97 Ranger XLT 2wd cheap (3.0 Vulcan, 5 Speed) a couple years ago while undergoing major house renovations, the plan was to use it till the renos are done and sell it.
Still have it though….with that blast furnace heater, comfy seat, to go with the versatility, rock solid reliability, good mileage(if you don’t step on it), it’s easy to work on & cheap to insure, what’s not to like?
Yes the interior is a bit cramped, it’s slow, the tires are a comically small 14″, not a lot of fun on the highway, skittish in hard rain, but as a weekend runner it’s hard to beat.
I have a work truck that came with one option which is air conditioning. Its a straight stripper truck otherwise. Does anyone have the same problem I do? Truck came from factory with rubber floor and the floor gets quite warm when driving it. Would carpeting it alleviate the problem? 1988 Ram auto/318 3/4 ton, 312,000 miles.
You know, now that I think about it. My 2011 Colorado’s passenger side floor gets warm. I figure it is the combination of no carpet(has the vinyl/rubber type work truck floor) and the cat converter being on that side causes it to warm up.
I’ve done many, many clutch replacements on these Rangers. People got tons of miles out of these trucks and could make the clutch last a long time if they were good with a stick shift. They were very popular trucks 10 years ago so Ive been under many of them. A new clutch master cylinderer was big PITA to bleed the air out due to the length of the hose, the angle of the installed cylinder itself, and the relatively short pedal travel. I developed a super easy way to bleed them by myself, while the other mechanics struggled and tried everything including lifting the back of the truck way up while bleeding it with assistance from someone else.
A friend of mine, who was on disability after being hit in the head and almost killed in a robbery attempt that went totally wrong, had Ranger after ranger. Most of them were purple, and pretty well stripped. The last one was the fanciest one, with a V6 and A/C. I don’t know how he could stand being in one long enough to pay it off. He was a big guy, and his left shoulder was pressed up against the door when he sat in the normal position. I rode in it once and couldn’t wait to get out. My S-10 Blazer had more shoulder room than the Ranger did, but I could hardly wait to get rid of it, just because I was tired of being so cramped. The only good things about then was they were fairly cheap and pretty much bulletproof. My S-10 was nearly issue free for the 5 years I had it, and the problems it all had were early on, in the first 3 months. It was on the road 22 years before rust just got so bad it wasn’t safe anymore. 2 of the friend who bought it from me’s sons learned to drive in it.
I have a good friend that had a ranger identical to the one in the picture. his had the 4l v-6 and automatic as the only options and was used strictly as a job commuter. he was a big guy but said with just him in the truck it was fine. it was finally retired at well over 400,000km(the odo broke) and one of the things that frustrated him was he could not get a similar replacement. he finally moved closer to his job and bought a used f150 as he said it was less hassle to replace the wife’s car every few years with her doing the commute than to try and find a small, basic truck.
We have owned a Ranger for about 15 years now. Ours is a 2000 XLT extended cab with the rear doors and jump seats, 3.0 V-6, automatic, power steering & brakes, etc. It’s perfect for our needs. The primary driver is 6’2″ and I’m 5’11”, so we needed the extended cab to get enough leg room and to have reclining seat backs to accommodate us. (We had driven a regular-cab Ranger once on a long trip, and it was awful.) It’s just the right size to fit in our garage, and we have something to use for hauling when need be.
Had pretty much the exact same Ranger XL, my first new car. Paid $8500 for it. Mine was a white ’93, minus the heavy-duty springs and oversized tires, but otherwise the same – 4 cyl/5-speed, rubber floors, vinyl bench seat, steel wheels, dogdish hubcaps, manual steering (parallel parking, which I did frequently as I lived in Chicago the whole time I owned it, was a bitch), not to mention no AC or radio. It was appallingly slow and gas mileage was average at best, but it was tough as nails and absolutely problem-free for the 7 years and 75,000 miles I owned it. My favorite car that I’ve ever owned, wish I still had it.
I bought a 2006 Chevy Colorado regular cab WT, 4 banger, A/T new. GM couldn’t sell them at sticker price, so I bought it @ 4 grand under the MSRP with all the incentives at the time. GM threw in A/C, carpeting, cruise, fog lights and upgraded wheels & tires as a free package upgrade to try and sell them. MPG’s are in the low 20’s city / mid 20’s hwy, about the same as the S10 4 banger it replaced. It has been trouble free but is a typical rough riding, bare bones, ultra cheapo truck.
I had a bright-yellow 2006 Ranger for 6 years – XLT 4×4 extended cab. It was reliable, handled well – and extremely visible to cops. I kind of regret trading it in.
With rebates and discounts, it was significantly cheaper than a full-size would have been, plus easier to park (I work on the outskirts of a city, and at the time would have to parallel-park it). My main complaint was that it was obvious Ford had pretty much given up on it – the interior plastics were awful, the radio still had a tape player, and it only had a mirror on the passenger side sun visor, because the guys who buy trucks evidently never need to check their hair.
Great COAL story. I had a 2010 Ford Ranger standard cab work truck for a month and a half(or so) back in 2013. I got it from Carmax. A month and a half later Carmax killed it by letting it fall off the lift when it was in for warranty work. They gave me more then I had paid for it and a good deal on a Kia Forte(which I loved) but I still missed the truck.
I set out to look for a larger truck or an extended cab Ranger. I loved the Ranger I had but it was a bit cramped. Yes I had ample leg room but as I am 6ft 1in tall, I had to have the seat back all the way and when I looked over at the passenger side, it was like I was up against the back window.
I looked at fullsize extended cab trucks but all were too big for me in the thing that mattered to me most, parking at home. I live in a town house community with assigned spots. My assigned spot was in front of my home but a fullsize truck would ether stick out too far into the street or too far over the sidewalk and both would get me in trouble with the fascists(aka Home Owners Association)
I looked at finding a first gen Tacoma as I love the look of the truck. The base model sits perfectly for me(high enough to drive the truck over the curb to drop things off to my back yard but low enough that I don’t need a step ladder to get into it(like a lot of the new trucks)
I wound up getting a nice 2011 Colorado regular cab work truck with only a few options (Bluetooth, CD Radio, A/C, Auto trans). It has served me well. It is my daily driver and gets good MPGs. It is very roomy
The only issue have is the door mounted cup holder. It seems GM manages to do one stupid engineering mistake in every model in their lineup. In my case it is the cup holder. The cup folder on the door is for water bottles. However when a water bottle is in the holder, you cannot roll the window up or down. What a stupid design
At 6’3″ I always found the Ranger’s cab cramped in any configuration, as I did my BIL’s Toyota. I had a Nissan King Cab with the 5 speed and V6 – I loved that thing long time, finally getting rid of it at 250k miles and 13 years only because apparently you need airbags and safety features when you have children.
Once I retire and don’t put 25k miles on a year, I look forward to a Ford King Ranch.
Many years ago when I first got into the dealership biz I worked at a Ford store that had a Ranger almost identical to the one described. It was also a 2.3l, stick, regular cab with no a/c truck. What a miserable vehicle to drive! I’m a leggy 6’3″ and lifting my left leg to depress the clutch usually had me turning the right turn signal on or occasionally hitting the squirters 😀 ! And gutless… oh my, was that turd GUTLESS. Zero to sixty in about a week and a half… IF you had a tailwind and were going downhill! Rumor had it that it was a lemon-law buyback due to, get this, “lacking power”! It didn’t have any power TO lack!!!
I think our 93 Ranger may have hit a sweet spot. It was a 4×2 long bed with the 3.0L V6 automatic, A/C, and XLT trim. It hauled a lot and got decent mileage because the extra power of the small V6 meant it didn’t work as hard. My only quibble was a lack of leg room, which was solved in 98 when Ford made the back of the cab 3″ deeper. I’ve driven enough full sized pickups to appreciate the extra maneuverability and more agile handling of the smaller truck, plus at the time it was actually cheaper than an F150.
2nd new vehicle I ever bought was a 92 Ranger XLT Extended Cab with the 3.0/5-speed combo. I loved it. It fit me and my needs just fine and was cheaper than a full size truck which I didn’t need. Wish I still had it.