can anybody tell me if there would be a big difference in gas mileage between an extended cab f150 with a v6 engine and an extended cab ranger with a v6 engine?

 

What year F150 and what year ranger?

3.0 or 4.0 Ranger?

Automatic F150 (very common) vs. 5 speed Ranger (very common)?

4x4 or 2x4?

FWIW, my '92 Reg Cab, long bed 5 speed 4.0 4x2 Ranger got about 5 mpg better than my SuperCab, '99 F150 4x2 F150 w/3.55 gears.

My dad had a mid '90's 3.0 Ranger extended cab 4x2 with 5 speed and he would get 30 mpg on the highway and 26 mpg all ardound driving, about 10 mpg better than his '01 V6 F150 Supercab with auto and 3.55. He drove slow, though.

 

Need some more info man

My old 93 ranger supercab 4x4 4.0L 5 speed lifted on 33s got 15 around town

My 06 F150 supercab 5.4L 4x4 gets 14-15 around town

 

They are pretty close to being dead even.

 

No they're not. Besides, the F150 weighs much more than the Ranger anyway.

 

Really, you are comparing apples to oranges. Dosen't the ranger sport the OHC 4.0L V6? Plus the F-150 is a fullsize, it weighs more!

 

In what way?

Yeah, there are some V6 F150's that might get similar mileage to some V6 Rangers, but that is going to be the exception.

 

That had to be a 2.3L that got that kind of MPGs. When I had my Ranger and frequented those forums, nobody with a 3.slow could ever claim that kind of MPGs. Especially city MPGs. I can see the confusion for that era Ranger, since they are both...slow. The 3.slow was not good on gas when grannied, since it needs revs to do anything.

Anyway the difference between a Loaded 4x4 4.0L Ranger SCab and a reg cab/shorty 4.2L/5-speed base F150 might be close, but that's not a fair comparison.

While my old 94 2.3L SCab Ranger averaged around 25 MPGs, I'll take the increased utility of my SCab F150 and ~5 less MPGs average.

 

Well....I've owned both. My 2003 Ranger 4.0, auto, 4x4 long box reg. cab never got any better than 17mpg. My 2005 Ranger X-cab 2x with 4.0 and auto would get right around 20 mpgs. My 2007 F150 with 2x, 4.2 and auto gets 20 mpg. Given the choice I would rather ride in a f150 than a Ranger. That is all......

 

I got rid of my 2003 2wd 4.0 auto Scab ranger with 3.55s for my current 2004 F-150 FX4 (5.4 auto 3.73) scab. I got 15-18mpg in the ranger and 15.5-18 in my F-150. Th choice to get a bigger truck with more capabilities with more options, better looks, and something I fit in was a no-brainer. From what I have read, the 4.2 in an F-150 gets similar mileage to the 4.6, which is usually 1-2 mpg better than the 5.4

 

So basically we're all saying the Ranger gets a tad better gas mileage? Seems to me case closed

 

Im with Ranger81 on this one my 93 Ranger 4.0 auto got around 15mpg... I get around 20 in my F150 4.2 5spd and much nicer ride than a Ranger