First Drive: 2012 Ford Ranger

By James Stanford

Australian correspondent James Stanford has always written about the trucks we don't get to drive in the U.S., like the Ford and Holden Utes and Volkswagen Amarok. This time, he gets behind the wheel of the global 2012 Ford Ranger.

If you live in the United States and like compact pickups, it might be best to hit the back button on your browser.

Why? I’ve driven the all-new 2012 Ford Ranger, which will be sold in 180 countries but not the U.S. It’s a great ute — or, as you guys like to say, truck.

Developed by a global Ford team headquartered in Australia, the new workhorse started as a clean sheet of paper, giving the team the freedom to build exactly what it wanted.

After a run through the South Australian outback, some road driving outside Adelaide and some load hauling, I believe the new Ranger could very well be the best hauler of its kind, possibly even beating the recently released Volkswagen Amarok, though a direct comparison would be needed for a solid conclusion.

We’ll get to the reasons this small pickup is so good in a bit, but an explanation of the truck is probably in order.


What’s New

The 2012 Ranger, which was code named T6, was cranked up in 2005. Ford led the project, and Mazda was involved. As it has in the past, Mazda will sell its own version based on the same basic vehicle, called the BT-50.

Engineers set out to knock off the king of the class, the Toyota Hilux, with a pickup that would suit the needs of most markets on the planet, including the Middle East, South America, Europe, Southeast Asia and Australia.

They came up with a rugged separate chassis ute that will be offered in 20 different variants, with Single Cab, Super Cab (with a second row of short-trip seats) and a spacious five-seat Double Cab.

You can have a regular steel bed or a cab chassis with a tiny aluminum flat tray on the back. There are low-riding two-wheel-drive versions and a more popular high-riding two-wheel-drive model.



Ford raided the global cupboard for engines and will offer a choice of a gas unit and two turbo-diesels.

Ford took the naturally aspirated 2.4-liter four-cylinder gas engine from the Fusion and Escape and mounted the alternator higher to aid with water crossing. This one has a variable intake camshaft and a standard exhaust cam. It manages 137 horsepower at 6,000 rpm and 167 pounds-feet of torque at 4,500 rpm. The entry-level turbo-diesel is a Ford Europe-sourced 2.2-liter four-cylinder with common rail injection. It used to serve in the Mondeo and now earns its keep in the Transit cargo van. Peak power is 148 hp at 3,700 rpm, while the torque is a handy 277 pounds-feet between 1,500 and 2500 rpm.

Spending some extra coin gets you the current range-topping engine, a 3.2-liter five-cylinder turbo-diesel, also from Europe’s Transit. This one makes 197 hp at 3,000 rpm and a more impressive 347 pounds-feet of torque between 1,500 and 2,750 rpm.

The gas engine makes do with a five-speed manual, while the two diesels come with either a six-speed manual or a six-speed automatic.


Power Hauling

We tested the 3.2-liter diesel, and it is a good match for the truck. It didn’t have to work hard on steep trails, and it didn’t seem to notice anything when we loaded 1,500 pounds of cement bags in back.

This is a fraction of what the Ranger can haul. Depending on the model, you can lug 3,368 pounds in back. The maximum tow rating comes in at a respectable 7,385 pounds.  

Ford says the Ranger’s frame is twice as stiff as the previous model and 10 percent stiffer than the Hilux’s frame. It uses leaf springs at the rear and a double A-arm setup at the front with upper and lower joints.

The cab is isolated from much of what is going on with the help of fluid-filled rubber chassis mounts that are more compact than those found on F-Series trucks.

All this helps contribute to an impressively smooth ride. The typical chassis jiggling over bumpy surfaces in these kinds of trucks is reduced to very low levels, and it feels more like the car-based utes in Australia rather than something with a ladder frame.

The handling is also eye-opening. The four-wheel-drive models we tested have 9.3 inches of ground clearance, so they‘re not sports cars, but they certainly punt along twisty roads better than other pickups of this size.

The Ranger’s steering is another highlight. It’s now rack and pinion rather than recirculating ball, and it feels more precise and predictable. The only downside is that there is very little feedback, and it can vibrate (with rack rattle) on some particularly rugged off-road trails.

We tackled some steep, rock-strewn tracks, and the Ranger handled them easily, thanks to its ample torque, low-range gears and the rear locking differential. With 31.5 inches of wading depth, it should be able to cross some reasonable waterways.

The new Ranger Double Cab is 218 inches long and 72.8 inches wide, and its bed is 70 inches long and 61.4 inches wide. The single cab’s bed is the same width, but is 91.2 inches long.


Ford has loaded the Ranger full of safety gear, including electronic stability control with roll-mitigation sensors, antilock brakes and six airbags on all models except the base, which gets two. Engineers told us they are confident that crash tests will show it is even safer than the current safety king, the Amarok.

The interior of the Double Cab is impressively spacious. A 6-foot-2 bloke sat comfortably in back while the driver put his seatback as far as it could go. There were no tears or threats because the seatback didn’t even touch his knees.

The interior design was influenced by power tools and chunky watches, but the engineers didn’t get too carried away, as everything is where it should be and is easily controlled.


You can operate some of the features using the voice-control system on premium models, an indicator of just how quiet the Ranger is. Extra sound-deadening materials were used liberally through the cabin and roof to make passenger conversations much easier.

Drivers can also use the Bluetooth system for phone operation via steering-wheel-mounted controls. You can also use Bluetooth to stream audio from music players.

The designers also factored in heaps of really useful storage areas, including a glove box big enough to stow a laptop, storage below the rear seats and a center bin that can be cooled to store beverages.

It will take a bit longer to see how the new Ranger holds up at worksites and in the outback, but our first impression is that it is a world-class ute that will likely give the Hilux a real scare.

We Australians do feel a bit sorry that Americans won’t be able to buy the new Ranger, but giventhat  we miss out on the F-Series, Ram and Chevy trucks because they aren’t made in right-hand drive, there is a limit to our sympathy.



@UncleBud - Thanks for the "benefit of the doubt".My F150 listed for 47,500. -12,000 in rebates brought it to 35,500. A TRD Tacoma 4x4 DoubleCab with Auto similarly equiped to my truck was 39K . The Tundra similarly equiped was around 47,000 with a 4,000 dollar rebate. Those were Canadian prices. The local Toyota dealer as well as all of the others in my region do not budge from MSRP. That does help with resale, but the last new truck I bought, I kept for 15 years. I don't plan on keeping this one as long as that, but who knows;)
The Ford rebate was what pulled the full sized truck under the price of the Tacoma. Sorry for not making that more clear. The deep discounts by all of the auto makers generally mean that a full sized truck can be had for less than the Tacoma (at least in Canada).
I've read of many guys say that full sized trucks aren't far off the price of a Tacoma on the US side of the border.
I've noticed that for some trucks and models, Canadian prices are considerably more expensive than their USA counterparts. The middle of the road trucks like the XLT are farely close to the US ones in price.
Toyota USA does seem to be more agressive with rebates than Toyota Canada. USA dealers also seem to be more willing to negotiate on MSRP.

@Jordan L - "Must be lonely at the top." or out on those trails that our big trucks can't go ;)

@Bob - nothing girlie about a Holden Ute with over 360 hp and 6 speed manual gear box.


Do you own a mid-size truck and why not? They're 90% the size of full-size with 90% the price and that's perfect for those niche buyers but they cost the auto makers 100% of full-size to produce and that's a real 'deal breaker'. If the Tacoma is the 'lone survivor', it's only because of it. Lots of love for mid-sizers online/blogs but not so much in reality. Same goes for those North Americans that think they want a diesel. Other downside is their MPG is not so hot and takes a real nosedive if worked hard. I mean up to their diminished payload/towing.

Then again, niche buyers don't seem to care but they're still niche buyers. For the rest of us, full-sizers are just too good and nevermind incentives. Half tons are just the right size/payload for most people especially when over 6'2". The current Colorado is a steamin' pile no doubt but how would a 'new and improved' lure buyers away from their Tacoma or full-size? People will keep buying what they've been buying regardless of how good something is. I mean once the novelty wears off, it's business as unsual but what's it gonna take to put oxy in one???

@Bob how did GM win again? They make the worst small truck on the market........

So Ford finally has a Ranger that can kick a Toyota Hilux ass and slaughter a Tacoma and Ford says to the USA f**k off you cant have one ?

If you click this link, it takes you to a page where you can send Ford Motor Company an email. We should spam them with requests for this truck. I'm not sure if it will do any good but it can't hurt to try

@BobMc US Pickups are not "masculine", or trucks, they are collectively put into the Ute category.
The "masculine" tag has diminished a bit with women driving buses,coaches HDT trucks and even petite blonde 20yr olds 300 tonne dumpers at mines.
What In Australia brings respect is what you can do with a Truck, .
Like reverse parking a Double B or Roadtrain. Like this 700hp Volvo or the 500Tonne ore Roadtrain below
Or using a Crane HDT to retieve a Semi from a ravine or using Trucks to tow a very heavy object.

I have a 98Ranger and love it. People ask me all the time if I have a new truck. I don't think it's looks any boxier than this one. Mine does have the chrome bumpers before they turned to plastic like Toyota. The only down side to my truck is 17mpg for a 4.0L V6. The 4door is great in theory, but just remember why you bought a truck in the first place. If I were getting a truck to haul the family around I would opt for the F150, but the Ranger is the perfect size for me.

@Lou, That Ford gave big incentives is where I thought you would go with this. Don't you think that the Big 3 would also do the same with their mid size trucks?

@DenverMike, we own 4 Tacomas at our timber company. The only full size trucks we own are 2 half-tons, the rest are all 3/4 to one ton trucks. For getting from tract to tract cruising timber, carrying small stuff like forestry equipment, chainsaws, overnight bags, cooler full of cokes and such, bumper dumpers, and for getting in and out of logging roads, even bush whacking from time to time through the woods, you can't beat a Tacoma. They are unstoppable. You also mention fuel economy, I agree that the Tacoma should get a more efficient engine. Ford has the answer above, and I would much prefer buying American.


I know it's mostly due to resale value, but doesn't that also indicate surplus demand in the market for midsize trucks?

Also, oxi is 100% correct that you can't take your half tons where he is going in his Taco, and I agree with him as well that Toyota should have sent a nice crew cab Tacoma to the $30K shootout as opposed to a stripped down extended cab Tundra. The Tacoma would have been very competitive in all catagories with the exception of acceleration contests.

It is amazing to me that the rest of the world, including some third-world and developing nations, are driving around in vehicles that I would love to drive. So much for the land of opportunity...

@Jason H, could be. I believe the outgoing Colorado and Ranger sales have been trending higher too. Could it be the US truck buyer is tightening his belt?

Are you people sure you don't want this truck just because its not sold in America? I mean if Ford abolished the F-150 tommorw and replaced it with this truck...How long would it be before people started yearning for the F-150 again?

I know some aussies who would much rather have the F-150 than the Global Ranger.

As long as Toyota won't bring the Hilux to the states, and other makes also won't bring their world pick up trucks, we won't see the Ranger in the states... this pick up truck was built to fight the global market...


Well yeah a good-size timber/construction company can find a use for every size/type/discription of truck. Can also hire elderly/handicapped/mentally impaired when a small company can't afford to. Point is mid-size trucks are mostly rejected for personal/commercial use in North America because 1/2 tons have them beat in almost all catagories. Noticed you don't actually drive a mid-size for personal/everyday use and that's what I'm talking about. You, oxi and a few others may love them but auto makers have crunched the #s and it just doesn't 'pencil out'.

If Ford could combine this with the 3 liter diesel from Mercedes I'd be knocking at the dealership door now. I am one who needs more payload than towing (3/4 and 1 tons are way more than I need in a truck and I don't have $50k to spend) so this would suit my needs perfectly.

I saw one response to my earlier post on the low power numbers and I agree that the base 2.4 will be to advertise a lower price but the only motors that will sell are the diesels.

Has anyone seen anything on updated motors from Ford for next year? Those Duratorque motors are known to be reliable but use a generation or two old tech and it shows in the wimpy power and torque numbers.

This truck may be coming to north america. I saw a white one on Sunday in Sauble Beach Ontario canada with the badges taped over.

@DenverMike I disagree that full size trucks beat mid size in as many categories as you apparently think they do. In my opinion, and I mean no disrespect, it is people like you that need to be sold on the usefulness of a mid size truck if they are to be successful here. Keep in mind that the full size segment with big displacement gas motors grew in popularity relative to mid and compact at a time when gas was cheap. The world, sad to say, is different now. The Ranger above with a good small diesel is what I want.

Speaking personally, I live in the rural midwest (northern MN) I need a new truck and this one fits my needs perfectly:

We get plenty of snow in the winter and the roads are ice-covered 4+ months out of the year so 2WD is really not an can't hardly even find them around here even if you wanted one.

I tow occasionally (~3K lb. boat, ~6k lb. Trailer with a Jeep on it, ~7k lb. Trailer W/Bobcat on it).

I hunt fall and winter (tight trails/snow).

I have a normal-sized garage. a full-sized truck fits, but it's so tight. Parking a vehicle that big in a space that small is nerve-wracking and it's just notworth the trouble.

I want decent mileage (minimum 20 combined...more is better, I'm fine with Diesel).

The current crop of midsize trucks are all either too small to tow that much, get crap for mileage, or are utter junk (looking at you Colorado).

I currently drive a 99 Silverado 4WD and it tows fine, but it doesn't fit in my garage, gets horrible mileage (13-14 avg) and is getting long in the tooth (160K miles). I have owned A tacoma in the past (2000) and I loved it (utterly competent and never once broke down) but I had to sell it back to Toyota due to the frame rot issue.

Help me out here, Ford!

I think the power rating for the 2.4 Liter is wrong. The article says 137hp @ 6000 and 167ft.lbs at 4500rpm. I don't know what the actual power rating is but by doing some simple math you will find that 167 ft.lbs * 4500rpm and then divided by 5252 (a constant) equals out to 143 hp at 4500rpms.

Since manufactures always list the peak I would think they would mention that instead, also I find it hard to believe that torque would drop off so fast to make it have less hp at 1500rpms higher.

@unclebud - I've seen some huge discounts on Ford Rangers, especially the base model reg cab 4x2, but not many people in the north buy them (4x2). I've seen some big discounts on the Colorado/Canyon twins. The Ranger Extended Cab truck is useless as a family vehicle. I should know - I owned one. The Colorado/Canyon twins were way too small, and have a poor track record.
When I looked at new trucks I did take a long hard look at the Tacoma doublecab. My wife and I were looking at camper trailers in the 5-7 k (loaded) range. That was at the limits of the Tacoma. MPG and cost also played a huge factor. I like the Tacoma. In many respects, I prefer it over the Tundra. I've owned small trucks in the past, and I wouldn't hesitate to buy one if my needs changed. If i were to spend more time offroad out of the cab of a truck, i would of got the Tacoma over the F150. My wife actually prefered the Tacoma as it is smaller. (Who ever said size matters to women? LOL).


Mid-size trucks do have advantages but they're marginal and start to diminish as you add options to the base 2WD. If everyone had your needs, mid-size trucks would out number full-size. They don't so Detriot won't. The Ranger, Colorado, Canyon and Dakota all sucked because there was no market to go after or fight for. They've devolved. Now take a good look at full-size trucks and their sale numbers despite $4 gas. Buy yourself another Tacoma because Detriot won't be building you a mid-size. They've done the research and moved on.

Ford and GM, Listen up!
We want a good small truck, not the bloated mid-sizes that you are wanting us to buy. Some people need full size and others need small. I want a US built small truck. Please don't make me buy an offshore small truck, I want to spend my money locally but will not buy what I don't want.

So the best selling American small p/u truck its going to be descontinued? I wander who its to pick up the sales?
Don't think Ford is that stupid.

Looks like a nice truck and with the larger diesel I'd be sold on the 7k tow rating. However, the 3,300 lb. payload - never not in a million years. Put 3,300 in the back and send me a pic. Love to see that.

@JoeBlow, you would be correct if you said F250-F450, not F150.

ScottH, in Asia these things run around with about 4000lbs in tray.
A photo of the previous Ranger Cab Chassis

Towing a 26ft 5thWheeler.

@Oxi: sure many of us full size drivers don't use them to capacity all the time or often enough. Agreed. But when I drove 2500 miles to see friends, and get some of the racecar parts, then also move an aluminum headed 350 with a 4 speed auto from Washington to Utah, then pick up one complete Dodge 340 and a one bare block and various other parts in Colorado also tow back a 3200 pound racecar on the trailer. 800 miles. Glad I had the capacity WHEN I NEEDED IT! Lets see, can an access cab Taco V-6 long bed move close to 6200 pounds or maybe more extra pounds? Not 25 miles, not 100. 800. And not overheat. No scary momments. Stops good. Oh wait the access cab wouldn't hold the amp/speaker I stuck behind my seat that I picked up in Boise, or barely the cooler. Come to think of it an access cab 4x4 V-6 taco longbed (the kind that has less bed area then my quad cab) Would just have a hard enough time getting 19 real mpg (an indicated 20 on the computer) @75-79 MPH with 500 pounds in the bed. Oxi, some mid sizes are good, but I'd rather have and not need then to REALLY need and not have. If I did this with a Taco, I woulda needed a second trailer

If this truck has such high weight ratings, what tire does it use? And what size are the brakes? Diesel engine specs get peoples attention, now try making it pass emisions here in the states. BUZZ BUZZ not gonna do it

@trx4TOM has not been released yet so do not know. As far as compliant diesels go? Well Ford has a 4.5 V8 Diesel waiting to go into a 1/2 ton . but development was canned. Nissan is using a 2.8 European Cummins diesel in a Titan prototype. The Japanese sell US compliant diesels in the US, the diesel engines are the same they sell elsewhere(Hino, Isuzu and Fuso)
Ford if it wanted to could easily make the 3.2 a US compliant unit., problem is they will not. There is a HUGE problems with diesels in the US, compliant or otherwise.

Make the damn thing an "F-100" sell it as an F-series and continue to win the crown and I hate fords (Thanks to the 6.0 PSD I Owned) but this truck is a winner

Ford...missed opportunity. As great a truck as the F150 is...everyone does not want one V6 or not. This could have been a contender with Toyota and Nissan in this segment.

The power rating in the article is incorrect, that figure looks like what the 2.5L TD in the old Ranger had (105kW). The new 2.5L petrol is rated at 122kW or 164hp.

The 1528kg payload is for the single cab 2.2TD HR model (high-rider aka 4wd suspension/tyre spec) only, the 3.2TD is not available in that body config but has ~75lb less payload when configured the same due to all 4x4 & 4x2 HR models having the same 7110lb GVM/13220lb GCM. To get the max double cab payload of 3065lb you would need to have the CofG ahead of the rear axle, realistically it means you can carry a decent chunk of that and not sag too much for offroad use etc.

It has 11.9" rotors, 16" rims on the base model, don't have tyre specs.

Maybe Mazda will import this truck. They have no other pickup of their own. This would be a great opportunity for Mazda to re-enter the small pickup market and provide a new small diesel that no other NA builder can.
But I'm sure that the EPA and Big 3 will make the process so costly and difficult that it wouldnt even be worth the potential increase in market share for Mazda.
For the last five years every auto manufacturer had been talking about bringing a new small diesel pickup or car to NA and look whats happened- NOTHING!

@arrogant Jordan L,

Don't hate me because I use my pickup for its intentions:

4x4, yes I off-road and not for winter driving only excuse! I drove many winters with just rear-drive pickups...

6' bed, yes I use it quite a bit, no poser small trailers hauling crap around like with most pickup owners because they refuse to use their bed for what it was meant for...

manual tranny, yes I am not handicap and not lazy like those automatic poser owners out there...

4-cylinder, yes most do not need a V8 to simply drive around town with...

No stupid decals on the side of my bed (FX4, Z71, TRD, NISMO, etc...), no glued on hood scoops that are not functional, no 22 inch wheels that hinder safety and performance, no straight pipes, no camo chip guards, etc... to show they are a real man, no deer antlers or NRA stickers to show they are a real man again and kill animals that do not even shoot back, most do not even have proper bumpers...


Yes people buy pickups for many reasons and if they don't use them for their full potential, they are POSERS!

If your not going to use it properly, buy a small sedan or suv for fuel efficiency!


I do not haul that much crap around because I do not own that much crap!

But to have a larger pickup as my daily driver because just a few times a year you need every dimension or torque doesn't sit well with me because your just wasting your full-size day in and day out...

Plus if I needed to haul something that large, I could rent a truck (U-Haul, Penske) and beat the crap out of it passing you on the freeway and flip you off for being so slow and save the excessive wear and tear on my daily driver, now that is using your brain!

@oxi - unless you offroad for work, rescue, police, or military service - you do not need a 4x4.

You offroad for recreation.

That is a "want, not a "need".

You don't NEED a 4x4 Tacoma any more than I NEED a 1/2 ton 4x4.
My truck fits my lifestyle, therefore a "want" not a "need".
No different than you in that regard.
No different than 90% of the truck guys on this site.

My truck is no better or worse than yours.
Mine fits my desires, your's fits your desires.

Oxi Quote
"Don't hate me because I use my pickup for its intentions:"

An offroad play toy is just as much a "poser" vehicle as a F350 pulling a 12 ft garden trailer.

Oxi quote
"if they don't use them for their full potential, they are POSERS!"
Are you using your heavily modified Taco to its "full potential" driving to and from work??

= "Poser"

If I planned on using a vehicle to its full potential every day I'd be in the commercial trucking market not the personal pickup market.

I read comments daily - guys like to buy trucks that give them a "margin of safety".

If you plan on pulling a 7K trailer you buy a 1/2 ton not a compact.
If you plan on pulling a 10K trailer you buy a 3/4 ton not a 1/2 ton.
If you plan on pulling a 14k trailer you get a 1 ton not a 3/4 ton.
If you get snow or poor roads to deal with, you get a 4x4.

Oxi - don't call anyone else arrogant.

Here id the definition:

"Having or revealing an exaggerated sense of one's own importance or abilities."

Do we "NEED" to go down that path?

@ Oxi
you aren't married with kids are you

I think it's absolutely absurd that they don't bring this truck to the U.S. give the Tacoma some competition will ya? It already took down the Ranger, Colorado/Canyon and Dakota. The only truck left that actually competes is the Frontier. Sure, the Hilux isn't sold here but we have a Tacoma for that. Ford. Please do something smart with this truck

I guess we'll just have to wait for Toyota to do a diesel Tacoma here. Good for the rest of the world getting a nice truck, I wish it were coming here. Too bad, Ford would make a killing off of a truck like this here in the US.

@don a so called 1/4 ton with a 3/4 ton payload, very good fuel economy and possibly off road ability. I think the problem has nothing to do with the vehicle, diesels or anything other technical issue.
More to do with the fact that Full Size Pickups are cash cows for the companies.
Looks like loopholes in CAFE will make it easier for the manufacturers.

@oxi- You sound like a pud.

@Oxi: pretty much most people on here will tell you, get what suits YOUR needs. I have what suits MINE. Sure, I can rent one of those Peske or U'haul trucks, every Friday night of the race season, so I can pull 70 miles round trip to the dirt track. When somebody in my family needs something heavy moved, off to U-haul or Penske I will go, to get something big, slow, and sucky gas mileage that can hold all my household goods. (when I actually NEED it) When my friends Camry needs taken to the dealership, I can put it on the trailer. Just like I can do with my 96 Camry, when it needs taken for an alignment. See Oxi, I bought the Camry so I can have an affordable 4 banger in town driving for when I am by myself mostly. And when I don't need to carry something big. It doesn't make sense for me to drive everywhere in a 1/2 ton quad cab 4x4. I can keep it in the garage so its warm in the morning (on a cold day), cause my truck doesn't fit there. Sure I could bought the V-6 Tacoma 4x4 4 door and towed at the max GROSS COMBINED WEIGHT on the way back on that trip. And every Friday. Nah, no thanks. I like having a bit more then necessary, so I am not abusing my stuff. The dirt track car will see the abuse....but thats ok. You just gotta expect STUFF to happen. As for my Camry, once my Daytona turbo is up and running, somebody else can use it, cause I can out MPG it, and go faster at the same time.

It looks like a baby Tundra, they ripped off the Tundra look.

and a person can say the TUNDRA ripped off some of its look from the RAM

Not much to look at.... Doesn't have that american machismo styling but I'd buy one in a heartbeat with those specs and a turbo diesel.

The news that Ford won't sell the Ranger in the US is shocking.
Especially when we were thinking of buying a new Ranger.
So now I will buy a Nissan or a Toyota.

Ford has forgotten why they built the Ranger in the first place.To complete with the Japanese small truck market that
Ford neglected. The the idiot mentality that says that the fuel economy of the F-150 is close to the Ranger so we don't need it anymore.

The price of fuel will go up especially if the economy picks up, (probably after Obama is thrown out of the white house),
so they will need to bring back the Ranger.

Insteal of discontinuing the Ranger, Ford should make it more fuel efficient and keep selling it. A diesel model would be wonderful, a 4 cylinder diesel would be better.

Ford ? Mullaley ? This is not one of your better ideas.


Yeah you know what...I don't use my 2011 F-150 FX4 5.0L to its fullest potential. I don't haul 2,000lbs in the bed nor two a 9,000lb trailer with it. So you can call me and my truck a ''poser'' all you want...But like Lou said...You're no different, Using you're 4X4 for ANYTHING other than work is using it for recreation THUS making it a want and not a need.

I'll tell you what buddy. When you start paying my bills for me. You can tell me what I should be driving...But as long as I am WORKING and paying my OWN bills...Your just going to have deal with the fact that I drive an F-150.

Good thing they are not bringing this ugly truck to the states.

The comments to this entry are closed.