cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Hagerty
Hagerty Employee

Review: 2020 Ford Ranger Lariat 4x4 | Hagerty Media

The third time we passed a tree snapped clean in half-its foot-and-change-thick trunk now splintered across Michigan highway 28-I began to get nervous. It was the first of November, and true to form, Lake Superior hadn't wasted a single minute spinning up Gordon Lightfoot's fabled weather.
https://www.hagerty.com/media/new-car-reviews/review-2020-ford-ranger-lariat-4x4/
14 REPLIES 14
Jost
Intermediate Driver

Thank you for a good write up.
Flashman
Instructor

I've often wondered how the size/weight of these "mid-sized" pickups compare to, say, a 25-year-old F-150.
Sajeev
Community Manager

If I remember correctly, the mid-sizers are still a coupla inches smaller in most dimensions and the curb weights are 0-300lbs lighter.  Of course, this all depends on body styles, trim, powertrain, etc. 

Greg_B
Pit Crew

Both the Ranger and Colorado appear longer to me than a regular-cab 1970s F100/C10 pickup. This strikes me as a big reason why they have not had more sales success, as there is just not enough size differentiation between them and the behemoth versions. I would be shocked if the vintage models were not lighter as well given the additional safety and convenience equipment burden the new models carry.
hyperv6
Technician

As an owner of a GMC Canyon I expected the Ranger to pass up my older truck but Ford dropped the ball.

The FX4 is a disappointment. Not only is it more expensive than my Denali but it has a much worse ride. The interior is of no better materials and the back seat will not fold flat for cargo. It really is of little value for cargo.

If you want off road GM really did it right with the ZR2. It is built to tackle trails with easy yet deliver a great on road experience.

These truck price point for customer drops fast once past $40K. They see much less sales and with most incentives even a V6 crew ZR can be found for $39K.

The Ford engine is the future for all these trucks as I expect the V6 to go away soon. The Toyota is just so outdated anymore and the seating is horrible as is the head room.

My GMC rides, handles and stops best in class and has been great.

What many mistake in this class is that they think we shop for price. Most buyers in this class buy for size. Many garages are not large enough for a full size. Also many people just don't need the larger truck.

The real thing here is for companies it is difficult to price a truck in this segment. To do all they like adds to the price and then it drives it up over the price of a full size. Even those buying for size like my self start to question the value of the full size that is nearly the same price.

You make these trucks too cheap then they fall apart or fail to live up to expectations. The years of the $9,999 Rangers, Taco's and S10's are gone.

GM has a new truck just about a year out if not delayed by the virus. I expect the new 2.7 Turbo and many new features to are added and I expect it to take the segment like the present truck.

Ford delayed the Ranger here as they were spending a ton of money on the Aluminum F150. It has not paid off as aluminum cost has gone up. Profits are not what was expected. The Ranger is being kept on Steel to keep the price down and profits up. The Ranger was always engineered for this country and the success of the mid size segment is now enough to have changed Fords plans.

Ford has a new truck coming also so it will be interesting to see if they address some of these issues as this truck is really old like the Taco if you count the years overseas.

Compitition does driver for better products and I hope that is what we see.
Greg_B
Pit Crew

To quote the author: "The Ranger’s interior is certainly nicer than the Colorado’s" - that's the first time I have ever read that in any review comparing the two vehicles. He then goes on to trash the layout and utility of the Ranger interior, which I have indeed read in every review of this vehicle. By the end, he also declares it not competitive price-wise either. What a strange review.

GRP_Photo
Instructor

Why not compare the Ford 4-cylinder to Tacoma's 4-cylinder instead of their V-6? Apples-to-apples and all that.
Utopia1
Detailer

Because Ranger's 4-cylinder was designed to compete with the Tacoma's V6. Clearly.
GRP_Photo
Instructor

So, if I understand this correctly, Ford charges thousands more for their truck than Toyota does and charges extra for the locking differentials that come stock with Tacoma's 4WD? They also charge extra for a spray-on bed liner while the Tacoma comes stock with a heavy-duty plastic one? I'll keep my Tacoma.
Rick2
Detailer

I was a Ford man for many years but they really did drop the ball on the Ranger. Many like myself do buy by size and the Ranger grew to much from the old ones. And I only buy single cabs. I tried a regular cab F150 but it was just to big to be comfortable in.
shoulderboards
Intermediate Driver

Two bad words apply: Turbo lag
Utopia1
Detailer

I drove the new Ranger extensively before I bought my new Tacoma. I had two major complaints and one minor. The two major was 1) I wanted a six-foot box with a four door truck - 5 ft feels like a toy, 2) I couldn't get over the looks of it. Particularly from the rear, it has odd proportions, too tall and narrow - like it was designed for Europe, not North America. Lastly, I keep my vehicles at least 10 years and the thought of a small, turbo 4-cylinder working to pull my 3,800 lb boat didn't sit well with me. My new Tacoma pulls it like a champ and I'm confident it will for as long as I want to keep it. Plus, it will be worth more than anything else in its class when the time comes to sell it.
Bill1
New Driver

I was looking forward to a new Ranger. I have been driving one version or another (Mazda B2000) since 1984. I still have a nice 2004 Ranger. I can afford a new truck and I thought I would treat myself. I cannot believe how large this is!
Guess I will be keeping my 2004 until something forces me to change.
MikeH
New Driver

I own a 2019 Ranger 4x4 XLT Supercab, with a 6' bed. I like it and have no regrets about my choice. I previously owned a 1992 Ranger and a 2003 Dodge Dakota, both with extended cabs. I nursed the Dakota along until the new Ranger became available. The Ranger is about 4" shorter than the Dakota, with more interior room.

I have a few comments on the article and responses to some of the commentary.

The Supercab comes with suicide doors on both sides. Easy access to the rear seats. I've had four people in it for hours. The rear is definitely tight, but not unmanageable for shorter folks. The rear seat bottoms easily remove to provide a flat interior cargo surface.

The reviewer's comments on the 10-speed transmission's response at high speed cruising are valid, but that's probably the case with most automatic transmissions. And I usually had to downshift out of 5th in my Dakota (with a V8) to get a responsive acceleration at high speeds. Too bad the reviewer did not select the Ranger transmission's Sport mode. It provides a significantly more responsive driving experience. I use it for all my driving, except when I'm cruising a high speed.

Turbo lag? There is no turbo lag with the Ranger. I think turbo lag is no longer an issue, in general. I own three vehicles with turbochargers - none of them have turbo lag.

The reviewer complained about the location of the side mirror adjustment. Really? How often do you use it? I set my mirror positions when new and haven't touched them since.

I was originally concerned about towing with the 4-cylinder engine. Not a problem. I towed a 3400 lb car on a U-haul car trailer for 2000 km. It was almost like it wasn't there.

I looked at Toyota, GM and Dodge trucks, too. I'm happy I waited for the Ranger.