Thriftpower: Ford Touts 2019 Ranger's Stingy Fuel Economy

by Steph Willems

Published: December 11th, 2018

thriftpower ford touts 2019 ranger s stingy fuel economy

Matthew Guy’s going to be mighty disappointed if this is all the big Ford truck news we receive this week. On the same week Ford rolled out its first drive event for the upcoming Ranger pickup, the Blue Oval revealed official fuel economy numbers for the four-cylinder-only midsizer — though specs already leaked last month.

Yes, it’s true. As you might have anticipated, the 2.3-liter Ecoboost four-banger and 10-speed automatic combo beneath the Ranger’s hood returns class-leading combined fuel economy. For a gasoline engine, that is.

The boasting is endless for this truck, which should begin appearing on dealer lots within a month’s time. First, it was power: 270 horsepower and 310 lb-ft. That torque figure beats ’em all in the midsize field. Then, max payload and towing: 1,860 pounds and 7,500 pounds, respectively. Again, class-leading, but there’s an asterisk hovering over all of these figures, just as there is for the Ranger’s fuel economy — it only applies to gas-powered pickups.

Ford cites an EPA-estimated fuel economy of 21 mpg city, 26 mpg highway, and 23 mpg combined for 4×2 versions of the 2019 Ranger. Add four-wheel drive and the figure drops to 20/24/22.

Oh, how Ford wishes General Motors didn’t sell the Chevrolet Colorado with an optional 2.8-liter Duramax diesel. That model outpulls, outcarries, and outtows the Ranger, and matches its rival’s combined fuel economy. It also tops the Ford by 4 mpg on the highway.

Still, Ford’s accomplishment is notable, as it beats any other gas-powered competitor by at least 1 mpg in combined driving. Looking at 2WD models (in combined driving), the Colorado with 2.5-liter four-cylinder gets 22 mpg, while the 3.6-liter model gets 20 mpg. Toyota’s Tacoma, in 2.7-liter guise, tops out at 21 mpg, as does the 3.5-liter version, while the Nissan Frontier sees a rating of 21 mpg for manual 2.5-liter variants and 19 mpg for the big, 4.0-liter six.

The Ranger trounces its 87 octane rivals in city and highway fuel economy, as well. Same story for 4WD versions.

If green living is a big part of your lifestyle, you’ll need to first decide whether your wallet holds enough of the green stuff before pulling the trigger on a purchase. Given that some of its rivals boast lower MSRPs, it could be a while before you realize those savings at the pump.

[Images: Ford Motor Company]

#2019FordRanger #Ford #FordRanger #FuelEconomy #Trucks

Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments

Join the conversation

3 of 83 comments

R Henry on Dec 11, 2018

Comparing a diesel and gas truck doesn't bring any clarity. The purchade prices ate not comparsble and the fuel price is not comparable either. It is like comparing a hamburger patty with a filet mignon.

Like Reply
- JD-Shifty on Dec 11, 2018
  
  you might to contemplate a healthier diet, if you're the typical demographic here
  
  Like
JD-Shifty on Dec 11, 2018

want to see something interesting, look up used prices on 1st generation Colorado with the 5.3 V8. Last made in 2011, they seem to go for about 20k with less than a hundred thousand miles.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

Zipper69 "The worry is that vehicles could collect and share Americans' data with the Chinese government"Presumably, via your cellphone connection? Does the average Joe in the gig economy really have "data" that will change the balance of power?
Zipper69 Honda seem to have a comprehensive range of sedans that sell well.
Oberkanone How long do I have to stay in this job before I get a golden parachute?I'd lower the price of the V-Series models. Improve the quality of interiors across the entire line. I'd add a sedan larger then CT5. I'd require a financial review of Celestiq. If it's not a profit center it's gone. Styling updates in the vision of the XLR to existing models. 2+2 sports coupe woutd be added. Performance in the class of AMG GT and Porsche 911 at a price just under $100k. EV models would NOT be subsidized by ICE revenue.
NJRide Let Cadillac be Cadillac, but in the context of 2024. As a new XT5 owner (the Emerald Green got me to buy an old design) I would have happy preferred a Lyriq hybrid. Some who really like the Lyriq's package but don't want an EV will buy another model. Most will go elsewhere. I love the V6 and good but easy to use infotainment. But I know my next car will probably be more electrified w more tech.I don't think anyone is confusing my car for a Blazer but i agree the XT6 is too derivative. Frankly the Enclave looks more prestigious. The Escalade still has got it, though I would love to see the ESV make a comeback. I still think GM missed the boat by not making a Colorado based mini-Blazer and Escalade. I don't get the 2 sedans. I feel a slightly larger and more distinctly Cadillac sedan would sell better. They also need to advertise beyond the Lyriq. I don't feel other luxury players are exactly hitting it out of the park right now so a strengthened Cadillac could regain share.
CM Korecko Cadillacs traditionally have been opulent, brash and leaders in the field; the "Standard of the World".That said, here's how to fix the brand:[list=1][*]Forget German luxury cars ever existed.[/*][*]Get rid of the astromech droid names and bring back Seville, Deville, Eldorado, Fleetwood and Brougham.[/*][*]End the electric crap altogether and make huge, gas guzzling land yachts for the significant portion of the population that would fight for a chance to buy one.[/*][*]Stop making sports cars and make true luxury cars for those of us who don't give a damn about the environment and are willing to swim upstream to get what we really want.[/*][*]Stop messing around with technology and make well-made and luxurious interiors.[/*][*]Watch sales skyrocket as a truly different product distinguishes itself to the delight of the target market and the damnation of the Sierra Club. Hell, there is no such thing as bad publicity and the "bad guy" image would actually have a lot of appeal.[/*][/list=1]