Raptor and 6.2L Shelved? Ranger Sticks Around
#31
07-20-2008, 11:25 AM
Graphics Contributor
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Buffalo NY
Posts: 2,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
. I actually looked at those before i got my frontier. Overpriced IMO.
#32
07-20-2008, 08:25 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Austin Texas
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#33
07-20-2008, 08:32 PM
Talk about beating a dead horse with a stick.
I get it, you drive slower than anyone on Earth and get better than average mileage. We get that.
My point is that YOUR reported numbers are NOT normal and for the AVERAGE consumer a Ranger would make more sense if they didn't need heavy duty truck duty and wanted better MPG.
I get it, you drive slower than anyone on Earth and get better than average mileage. We get that.
My point is that YOUR reported numbers are NOT normal and for the AVERAGE consumer a Ranger would make more sense if they didn't need heavy duty truck duty and wanted better MPG.
Speaking of that stick, you should remove it from your *** prior to posting. 
Numbers are just that, numbers. Mine are mine, yours are yours. I can't help the fact that some people don't know how to drive.
#34
07-20-2008, 10:01 PM
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyways.. Ive ranted about the ranger over and over again from real world experience ive had with it, there's nothing good to say about the ranger, when it comes to driving it, and thats all that needs to be said. Even if it got the numbers that EPA claims, its still not great numbers for a truck it's size. The 4.0l, in the real world doesnt get any better mileage then the 4.6L f150. I drive my f150 with a heavy foot when its not connected to a trailor and I still get good mileage.
