The Last Ford Ranger From Twin Cities

2011 Ranger II

Although we reported earlier this year that the soon-to-be-discontinued Ford Ranger would end production by Dec. 22, more recent reports from Ford have the final production date at the end of this week (Dec. 16) or the following Monday. 

The Twin Cities Assembly Plant in St. Paul, Minn., has a storied 86-year history, producing such U.S. sales favorites as the Model T, Country Squire and, finally, the last small pickup truck Ford would produce for sale in the U.S. The plant employs more than 800 workers and has built over 7 million Rangers, with no plans to design, engineer and sell a replacement model here, though a new Ranger is sold overseas.

The 1983 Ford Ranger, which started production in January 1982, was a replacement for the Ford Courier, which was based on the imported Mazda B-Series small truck. Ford wanted a scaled-down, lighter version of its full-size F-Series pickup that could work hard, get good gas mileage and compete against small Japanese trucks from Datsun and Toyota and against the U.S.-built Chevrolet and GMC S-Series pickups from GM. 

Reports are that the last Ranger has already been sold to one of the largest, consistent purchasers of the pickup (in fact, we're told they may have also bought the very first Ford Ranger), Orkin Pest Control.

Ranger Orkin II

1984 Ford Ranger


While I think it would be great if Ford would build the new Ranger at this plant--good riddance to this one... .

don't worry ford fans you can buy the greatest now a chevy or gmc and soon will be going wow why did i waste my time on buying ford dangers i mean rangers haha

Lol@johnny doe, the name fits you well. "A nobody."

says the guy with the gutless v10 furd

I see Stanky Franky has found another thread to troll in.
At any rate, it is good to see the Ranger put out to pasture. Talk about beating a dead horse.

It is good that the very last Ranger will be used as a work truck.
A fitting end.

maybe we can get the Orkin man to come in here and fumigate for Franks.

I doubt that Orkin will use the last ranger to work. Ranger is tired and needs to be retired.

Oh. Look. A Ford troll fighting Chevy trolls. A case of Dumb and Dumber. I bet they will fight for the title of dumber.
The last Hummer went to a discount rental company and the last Ranger went to a discount bug killer. Go figure.
Just goes to show how stupid the trolls are.

i miss it already

Simple economics. After milking the Ranger's old R&D for decades and not reinvesting on a new one, Ford stands to walk away mega billions ahead. The compact truck segment has been going away for years and down to 4% of the truck market so no point in throwing billions upon billions into a dying market.

Half tons happen to be about 70% of truck market and extremely profitable so there's even less incentive to build a Ranger replacement or import to or build the global Ranger in America only to cannibalize the F-150.

Let Toyota and GM take the loss if it makes them happy.


GM looks to take more of a loss than Toyota. Toyota sells Tacomas. Its the Tundra that hurts their bottom line. If people think midsize, they think toyota first. Just look at their sales numbers. It's GM that will take a loss as they make a good, profitable full-size pickup.

Thanks for the memories Ford. Hello rice burners!

90% Domestic parts content
Assembled in USA
Up to 27 mpg
Manual Transmission
Easy to work on
And those damn jump seats

Oh well these will out last everything else Ford/Chevy/Dodge/Toyota/Honda/everything makes so we'll be seeing these for the next 200 years lol

Toyota will own this segment like they always have. My truck is a Super Duty King Ranch and I only drive Ford trucks and Ford cars. The Ranger never appealed to me one bit though. They just didn't have the off roading capabilities of the Toyota's unfortunately. Neither did the S-10 or Dakota for that matter. Those smaller Toyota trucks could take a serious beating out on trails. That's all I've ever seen off roading for the small trucks.

It's really the same reason the Super Duty owns the 2500 segment and up. A Chevy simply can't do what a Ford can do off road. That low hanging frame and their IFS killed Chevy trucks in our heavy duty market. It's a 1 trick pony. People don't like to pay the same amount of money for a horse that can only do 1 trick. They want the full package and Ford offers it, On road, Off Road, Interior packages.. Chevy offers a pavement truck only and no King Ranch or anything. I also don't see the new Chevy S-10 or Colorado (whatever they'll name it this time) doing any better unless it has the off road capabilities of a Toyota Tacoma. Then they'll have to fix how Ugly it is. That truck from Thailand is about the ugliest small truck I've ever seen. No way will that look sell here in the States.

Since they were selling 50,000 of these a year and no R& D cost in the last 15 years, it makes one wonder if they closed this plant due to the same reason they closed the plant in Hazelwood Mo. where they assembled the Explorer and F150. FOr those that do not why it was closed, it had nothing to do with politics or tax encentives but the cost to operate the plant. Hazelwood had the highest rate of people out on disabilties then any other plant in the US which created a losing situation for Ford, so they closed it down.

The first gen Ranger was a workhorse and no one makes them like that anymore. Consider some of the options:

6' or 8' bed length
Dual fuel tanks
4cyl Diesel
Manual t-case and hubs
LSD in front and rear axles (had not been done since by anyone until the raptor)
Heavy Duty steel skidplates
4.10 axle gears
3-speed auto from F-150

Ford went all out when they released the Ranger and then they slowly softened it through the years.

They will be missed. Sadly, Ford is likely to eventually replace it with a Focus based "Ranchero" offering.

Say Good By to the RUMP RANGER FORD you ford girly men. It was UGLY when it was born and it is still ugly today. Don't worry ford girly men, you will have a great ALL NEW CHEVY COLORADO to buy. GM is covering ALL THE BASES. Ford is covering the F-150's arse.

Once again, GM WINS and ford loses with the demise of the RUMP RANGER FORD.


I would disagree with you on the off-road capability. I had a stock 2000 that would go anywhere a stock Jeep would. The difference between the Tacoma and Ranger off-road was aftermarket support - tons for Toyota, almost none for Ford. '97 and older where even more capable with the TTB front end - and they are still the basis for many pre-runners and desert racers (far more so than Toyota) due to their wheel travel and potential for much more.

@ Ron

I dont know what state you live in but in So Cal and most of the southwest 80 percent of the most offroaded trucks out here are Ford Rangers. The twin ibeam was so durable that everyone and their mother was turning the Rangers into "Pre-Runners" and the was long before anyone herd of the Raptor. This is going back to the late 80's to the present. I do see a couple Toyota's here and there and hardly ever see a GM truck of anykind doing serious offroading. Just google "Pre-Runner" Ranger. These are also peoples daily drivers i see on the road everyday.

Pest control companies were the major people buying these things. The Tacoma will not see a huge increase in sales like a few people on the internet were claiming. The main reason Orkin bought these Rangers was because they were cheap. Orkin will be much better suited with a Transit type van with an enclosed cargo space.

Take away the pest control companies and the people who want cheap transportation then you don't have much of anything going to the Tacoma.

Quote Ron: Toyota will own this segment like they always have. My truck is a Super Duty King Ranch and I only drive Ford trucks and Ford cars. The Ranger never appealed to me one bit though. They just didn't have the off roading capabilities of the Toyota's unfortunately. Neither did the S-10 or Dakota for that matter. Those smaller Toyota trucks could take a serious beating out on trails. That's all I've ever seen off roading for the small trucks.


Are you freaking kidding me..Toyota only started "owning" this segment since the redesign of the Tacoma. Before that it was Ranger #1, S10 #2 and Tacoma fighting with Dodge for a distant 3rd.

To put it in perspective in 2002 Ford sold over 300K Rangers.. a number which the entire segment today cant match when all sales are combined.

Yeah Tacoma may be the best truck available to buy now in the midsize segment.. but thats because the major players have left it or treat it as a afterthought because they realize that the full size segment is the money maker and that is why Toyota is 4th in the full size segment.

If Ford or GM decided they wanted the shrinking midsize truck segment they could easily dedicate the necessary resources and build a truck that will exceed the Tacoma. But to them (and I agree) it is just throwing good money after bad, making it a unwise business decision.

The TTB was about as tough as a SFA but rode better. With longer radius arms it was possible to get some sick wheel travel out of it. The only downside is that tires wear out quickly and keeping them aligned can be a chore.

@DB - you make an interesting point, Tacoma was an underdog until it was "supersized" in 2005. However, did it actually gain sales #'s or did the other contenders just drop in sales therefore making the Tacoma #1 by default?

It's also true that not much has happened since '05 in the compact market, Dakota got uglier, Colorado still wasn't the S-10 it replaced, and Ranger did nothing. The automakers are probably just as much to blame for the loss in sales of the compact market.

These are good little trucks. My daughter has a 2004 supercab Edge model with the 4L V-6 and it's been bullet proof! She has 190,000 miles on it and it's been in the shop once for two lights in the dash getting replaced, that's it.

Loved my 85 Ranger XLT 4X4 with the 2.8L V6. Awesome offroader. Has the front and rear limted slip. Left an "Offroad" packaged 95 S10 in the dust on the trails.

I'm currently in the market for a used 2004 or newer ranger. Nothing comes close to the value. I can probably get one for under 4000 dollars, get 25 mpg or better, have the comforts i need. The capability to do what I want 90 percent of the time. And when I need to do some heavy hauling or off-road I have my my super duty. I for one am sad to see the ranger die. There is no comparable replacement for the 2wd 4 cylinder model. BTW I think Bob, johnny doe, gary, and troll patrol, michigan bob, kansas bob, robert ryan are all the same person. It sure would be nice if you had to create an account and login to post comments on this site.

When I was a kid, the Ranger was the first car I ever wanted.
Had a ford ranger poster pinned up in my room.

So what's going to happen? They'll come out with an Americanized supesized compact guzzler truck called the F100 just for the Northamerican market?

DB, Toyota sold a ton of small pickups prior to them renaming it the Tacoma. Very popular for lift kits and 33" and up tire add ons. It was just known as the Toyota Truck back them. Very good off road too.

Very sad day in history, as a Ford Ranger guy I know that the chevy guys can understand because they went through the same thing when they lost the s10, a decent truck. Seems like Orkin knows a good truck when they see one. I wonder how many of us are going to try and hold on to our Rangers, or keep on buying used Rangers while were at it.

Orkin needs a real truck to do work, not some cheap flimsy Tacoma and Culorado.


Not Robert Ryan, he is actually post fact. The rest of the pest you mentioned need to be sprayed by Orkin.

I've never been interested in a truck smaller than the half-tons but last weekend I was able to take a look at my grandfather-in-laws 2008 Ranger 4x4, supercharged, he picked up a few months back. I admit I was quite impressed. In the end it doesn't fit my needs but I certainly can see the appeal. I'd certainly consider it if I didn't have kids to haul around as well as the need for towing and the ability to throw a 4x8 sheet of plywood in the back. Well, it's not like there won't be Rangers all over the place any longer, just not on the new car lots.

A lot of people are saying the current Ranger was outdated and outclassed, and that may be true, but they've served a lot of people well for a lot of years. I've seen these little trucks do some pretty amazing things. Around here there are tons of late 80s - early 90s rangers running around, and they're almost always overloaded with firewood, cinder blocks, scrap metal, and furniture. I even saw one pulling a minivan on a double axle car trailer once. He wasn't going fast, but he was getting there. The Ranger was the last true compact pickup. Love 'em or hate 'em, it's the end of an era.

I bought a new Ranger in 1984. It was my very first truck. It was an okay lttle truck. The front end was too weak for the addition of aftermarket tires. Ford did upgrade it a few years later. I also owned a used 1993 extended cab. I bought it off a friend who owned it since new. I got a good deal. It needed a few repairs but that was offset by the purchase price. I'd probably had kept it but it was a useless family vehicle (even with the extended cab). The gas mileage was okay, but the currrent full sized trucks are comparable.
I'm not going to cry about the demise of the Ranger. I don't care if a car company doesn't make what I want. I'll buy what I want from whomever makes it. (If it is worth a damn). If I decide my next truck has to be a compact, I'll buy what is available. If nothing meets my needs, I'll buy the closest compromise. No big deal.

"I'm not going to cry about the demise of the Ranger. I don't care if a car company doesn't make what I want. I'll buy what I want from whomever makes it. (If it is worth a damn). If I decide my next truck has to be a compact, I'll buy what is available. If nothing meets my needs, I'll buy the closest compromise. No big deal."


@Lou - What do you mean the front end was too weak for aftermarket tires? My '84 lived (for a while anyways) with 33's any my 5.0. To be fair I had a James Duff suspension on it but the front axle was stock. I also had an Oxi - style overkill 200lb "tumba burro" bumper hanging off the front.

Chevy has the Bobs, Johnny doe,Greg
Toyota has oxi
Ford has Frank

@toycrusher84 - I used to loose at least 1 stub shaft or u-joint a year offroading. The stock springs were pretty weak in the fornt as well. I ended up swapping them out. Ford did upgrade to a larger front end assembly. I can't remember the year. Even some of the magazines of that era said the same thing.


I post facts, you post BS.

You don't see me post "FORD WINS, GM LOSES."

Grow up little man!

My dad boght one of these new in '94. Well, it said MAZDA on it (B4000), but they rolled off the same factory down in St. Paul. He used the piss outta that thing (he was a contractor...filled it with tools and pulled a 7000 pound Bobcat trailer all over the state almost every week). It always ran perfectly and only broke when he finally ditched it. Good little trucks.

@Frank you are a troll just like me. admit it. your sh*t stinks as much as mine.
Facts? What facts. Your old v10 is great. who cares? Call antiques r us.
You dont say Ford wins, GM looses.
you just did.

Okin man, this is putc, um, yes , we do have a pest problem. can you send someone right over. What kind of pests? See for youself. Use a 7.3 as bait and lots of used oil.

I ain't going to argue with an infant. I would never say my 6.8L V10 is the best thing since beer. Get real!

My V10 does what I ask and returns the favor with it's reliability. This trucks fits my needs, my next truck is the Raptor. Don't hate when I comment on how cool it is.

Nice try though little man.

Frankie spankie has his panties in a wad or is that a wad in his panties?
Ooohhhh....ooohhhhh...a.. aaa...furd.. post...
you are a troll
we are 2 sides of the same coin
You sound like the taco troll
Trolls do sound alike

Appears that Denver Mike is pro F150 and above and the rest of the truck buyers can just leave the market. Ok Denver Mike you can fall in love with just F150s but there are others that want other choices besides big trucks. The fact that the Ranger came in number 2 in midsize to compact trucks, just behind Tacoma does not mean its a failure. A 20 old Ranger design selling that well is more than just a cheap price. If it were junk it would not sell that well. Ranger from the time it was introduced 30 years ago was a success. It is a shame that this Ranger could not have been update a little and with a little advertising it would still be a competitive product. Denver Mike you are old school thinking that only bigger is better. Sometimes a small package update is more than adequate for many buyers, but since you don't like the rest of the truck buyers to buy anything but Raptors then your vision is limited. I think this is a sad day for consumers wishing for more choice in the smaller truck market. This is a product that could have been a lot more successful with a little more updating and some more marketing. This is a little truck that has made a huge contribution and has been treated as a stepchild by Ford. Well Ford does not have to worry about any future busniess for me. Thanks Ford. I don't think GM will take a loss if this new Colorado is better than the old. If their loss is like the Chevy Cruze then bring it on. As a small truck buyer I prefer to remain Raptorless.

The unions and Minnesota politicians kill another business.

@Frank - I dont blame you for not arguing with infants. Loosing all the time sucks.

They should have put the eco boost 4(tuned for torque) in it to replace the 3.0 and the updated 3.5v6 from the stang (tuned for torque) to replace the 4.0

I would place money on the fact that the eco-boost would get 35+mpg while completely out performing the old 3.0

I really think ford could have improved this platform on the cheap and increased sales. Too bad, i'll just have to keep getting used ones.

The comments to this entry are closed.