Looking at a compact pickup

Discussion in 'The Club House' started by cameronguyton, Jul 27, 2009.

  1. cameronguyton

    cameronguyton New Member

    327
    0
    0
    So it seems that the only true compact pickup is Ford Ranger/Mazda B Series. But why can't a person get a truck with 4wd, and a 4 cylinder under the hood? If you opt for the 4wd, they make you take the V-6. Not only that, you have to get the ext. cab. Am I just being difficult and too picky?
    Is there a truck that I may have over looked that might fit my criteria?:confused:
     
  2. spittinfire

    spittinfire New Member Supporter

    9,663
    4
    0
    The only one that I'm aware of is the Toyota. Ford used to build a ranger exactly like you're asking for but they stopped in the late 90s. Most people don't want a 4cl, 4wd, regular cab pickup anymore. I am a Ranger fan though.

    I've got a 1994 Ranger, 4.0 v6, ext cab, 5 speed, 4x4 with 275,000 miles on it and going strong! Doesn't even use oil between changes. My dad has a 91 with 260,000 on it when he got rid of it and he's got a 97 Explorer with 270,000 on the 4.0 SOHC. Good trucks!
     

  3. CA357

    CA357 New Member Supporter

    19,847
    3
    0
    I'm on my fourth Ford pickup. I had two F150 2x2 XLT Supercabs, then a 3.0 V6 Ranger XLT Supercab with a 5 speed and now a fairly loaded 2008 4.0/auto Ranger XLT Supercab 4x4.

    I love this new Ranger. The cab has four actual doors. That and the 4WD are the main reasons I bought it. It's got way more stuff than I needed or wanted, but it is nice to have some of it.
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2009
  4. AsmelEduardo

    AsmelEduardo New Member

    2,443
    0
    0
    Chevrolet Colorado

    Chevrolet Colorado makes it... in Venezuela you can find it with L4 (or L5) in single or crew cab with 4WD and manual 5 spd trans. In U.S. Isuzu sells it too...
     
  5. JohnnyLoco

    JohnnyLoco New Member

    32
    0
    0
    I've driven full size chevys all my life. In 2007 I bought a Colorado Z-71 crew cab with 3.73's and a locker. I'm running Goodyear Dura-trac tires and I get 27MPG on the highway with a 5cyl.

    I just bought a Nissan because I'm not buying anymore american cars. Nothing seems to get the gas milage of the little chevy.
     
  6. cameronguyton

    cameronguyton New Member

    327
    0
    0
    The Chevy Colorado is more of a midsize truck.

    But maybe I'm just different in that I really don't want all the frills of a vehicle. I like 4wd, manual tranny, and a good hard working engine. Manual windows and seats, sliding rear window. Something that I won't cry over when I get a scratch on it when I'm playing in the woods.

    Oh well, to each his own I guess.
     
  7. stalkingbear

    stalkingbear Well-Known Member

    4,095
    30
    48
    I too like 4x4, manual transmission, and a good engine BUT the (IMO) biggest optional engine is barely adequate if you're going to really use it like a truck should be used. The manufacturers are so concerned about fuel economy that performance suffers-especially in smaller than full size trucks. My Dakota has a V8 and I've added performance goodies & lifted it. Now I can not only go anywhere I want, I can also haul/pull whatever I want-damn the measely 18 mpg fuel milage.
     
  8. cameronguyton

    cameronguyton New Member

    327
    0
    0
    That's exactly why I'm wanting the 4 banger. I would look for a good used Toyota pickup (pre-Tacoma) or Nissan Hardbody, but people seem to want more than they're worth around here.
     
  9. JohnnyLoco

    JohnnyLoco New Member

    32
    0
    0
    I agree with the toyota, I disagree with the manual tranny. I likes to keep power to my wheels and concentrate on other stuff besides shifting and I ain't never messed up a chevy or Jeep auto tranny while 4wheelin.
     
  10. Yunus

    Yunus New Member

    5,250
    0
    0
    4X4 = more weight and more moving parts so more energy required to do the same task. The 4 cylinder may not be able to handle the extra work required and still have the longevity customers expect.
     
  11. 7point62

    7point62 Lifetime Supporting Member Lifetime Supporter

    2,188
    0
    0
    Take the 4x4 V6 with ext cab


    [​IMG]
     
  12. spittinfire

    spittinfire New Member Supporter

    9,663
    4
    0
    I agree with this. I've got a 4.0 v6, the largest engine offered in a Ranger and while it will pull 6,000+ lbs(and yes, I do it), you know you've got a load on. I've added a few performance parts as well, full exhaust, limited slip front and rear, intake, just bolt on stuff. I really wish Ford would have slipped the 5.0 in Rangers, that would have been a SWEET little truck!

    Hey bear, what size tires are you running on your Dodge? Mine left the factory with 31s on it and they're still there.
     
  13. Benning Boy

    Benning Boy New Member

    9,624
    1
    0
    What about carbon emissions? I frankly want a poor performer. Something that gets 6 MPG and spews sulphur. Performance isn't nearly as important as me impacting the environment.

    I want a truck that runs off of wood from virgin rainforests.:D
     
  14. CA357

    CA357 New Member Supporter

    19,847
    3
    0
    Now that's damn funny. :D
     
  15. cpttango30

    cpttango30 New Member

    13,934
    4
    0
    Sounds to me like you want to old chevy Luv.

    you put a weak 4cyl in a 4wd and your not going to be doing anything but getting stuck.
     
  16. spittinfire

    spittinfire New Member Supporter

    9,663
    4
    0
    I disagree with that tango, there are TONS of 4wd 4cylinder trucks and jeeps out there. I don't want one but they can work.
     
  17. stalkingbear

    stalkingbear Well-Known Member

    4,095
    30
    48
    My wife made me get rid of my last "toy" while I still had a driver's license-it was an 89 Ranger that I took a 5.0 & bored/stroked out to 347ci built up, and installed with a police interceptor transmission (6 clutches in each pack instead of 5, and wider overdrive band). It was getting an honest dynoed 430 hp (at flywheel) . It was only 2wd so wasn't very practical-damn fun to drive though:cool:.

    My Dakota has locker in rear, 3.73s, 33x12.50 m/t (thinking about going bigger- to 35s), ported heads, "slightly bigger" cam, 8" total lift, jet performance chip, bigger, free flowing exhaust, ram cold air intake, Higher pressure injectors, I'm almost done with it. I wish I knew how to post a picture on here (it asks for url-whatever that is). It does "pretty good";).

    My latest project is my nephew's 1950 Ford coupe. I'm "helping" him build it from a rolling chassis. It's going to have a 416ci 351w:D. The best thing about it is he's paying for all of the parts/machine work. The only I can afford to build anything anymore.

    Sorry for hijacking thread-back to the subject at hand. I had 2 4 cyl Rangers with 5 speed manual & both times my hard usage proved to be simply more than they could hold up to.

    I gave my ol Dodge 250 with all 1 ton running gear (dana 70 rear,dana 60 front), 4.10 lockers, 446 ci to my boy & I still miss it. It gets about 4 mpg. I've done things with that truck that God & Dodge never meant for that truck to do.




     
  18. cameronguyton

    cameronguyton New Member

    327
    0
    0
    I take it you have never owned a Toyota Pickup(pre-Tacoma) or Nissan Hardbody. The Nissan wasn't quite what the Toyota was, but I owned one for several years and put it through a very tough life. I saw it a couple weeks ago still running to the guy I sold it to.

    I've about decided to get the Ranger with the ext. cab and V-6. If I do, I'm sure I will wear it out the first week I have it in the woods, just like I did my Jeep. :D
     
  19. fisher77

    fisher77 New Member

    232
    0
    0
    I had a 4 cylinder ranger once. It didnt get but about 21 to the gallon, and if I was driving into a 40 mile an hour head wind, wich happens quite often on the south plains, I would have to hold the pedal to the floor to maintain 60 miles an hour. I think the Ford 4 cylinder is way to under powered for a 4x4. As far as the toyota goes, a buddy of mine has one jacked up with big as# tires, and has the same trouble with the wind, but says it off roads just fine. I would go for the 6 cylinder.
     
  20. Yunus

    Yunus New Member

    5,250
    0
    0
    Nothing is set in stone but if your looking at a new vehicle in America today when you add in all the safety features(weight) most 4x4's(weight) don't match up well to 4 bangers. I drive a 4 cylinder vehicle that is faster than most V-6's out there and some V-8's but its a smaller lighter vehicle, and I got a turbo.