2002 Ford Ranger XL 2dr Regular Cab (2.3L 4cyl 5A)
Parents got the truck thanks to house remodeling and continued house work. Ours was an automatic. Its fit and finish is seriously rough! I understand that it is bare-bones, but does the gear indicator have to be so...off? The engine is too weak and shakes the car like a manual on 3rd gear during take-off, but decent MPGs for a truck though, around mid-20s. Brakes are sensitive and effective. Feels like I am about to fall off the seat when turning. Middle "seat" is completely useless, and I don't know if the feds count it as one. Lost a lot of things thanks to a shallow pit of a door rail/handle.
This truck looks good. Decent MPGs for a 2002 truck. Good for rough roads, possibly offroad, although never seen them used offroad. Good for light duty construction.
The engines are seriously weak. Since Ranger drivers are for home-owners and light construction crews, they usually stick to gravel, dirt (and asphalt). A unibody should be fine. (Now that the Escape has changed, the Ranger might as well change too. Can't sustain a chassis by itself)
Use a deeper well door well/rail/handle.
Fit and finish seriously needs improvement.
† Edmunds.com received the highest numerical score in the proprietary J.D. Power 2014 Third-Party Automotive Website Evaluation Study℠. Results based on responses from 3,381 responses, measuring 14 companies and measures third-party automotive website usefulness among new and used vehicle shoppers. Proprietary study results are based on experiences and perceptions of owners surveyed from January 2014. Your experiences may vary. Visit jdpower.com.