Ford Ranger review and buyer’s guide
The Ford Ranger is the most popular vehicle in this country because it has grunt, great towing ability, a capable drive system, and a host of clever design features. But there are a couple of negatives to consider before dropping your cash on one.
The Ford Ranger is Australia’s favourite dual-cab ute because it offers a breadth of capability in off-roading and heavy-towing related use. But you need to know if it’s a good, reliable workhorse.
And what are the consequences of buying a Ranger in Australia? Ford might win the truck market over Chevy in the United States, but is it a rational, objectively smart proposition to undertake in Australia?
Sure, Ranger has got the looks, but has it got the punch to tow, haul and get the job done?
The so-called ‘all-new’ Ranger is based on the same T6 platform as the previous generation, and features the same 2.0-litre twin-turbo diesel four-cylinder engine, albeit tweaked ever-so-slightly. But there is a V6 diesel option which is the headline powertrain that’s definitely worth a closer look if you have bobcats and ride-on lawn mowers to haul around on a daily basis.
Tough looks go a long way with ute buyers, and Ford has certainly done its market research for the new Ranger. It presents a muscular stance with consistent proportions, with a big smug Ford face at the front so all your mates instantly know you’ve got the F-150’s little brother.
There are some clever design elements hidden into the theme, such as integrated side steps in the bodywork aft of the rear wheels. These have been used on pickup trucks for at least a decade - see the 2013 Chevrolet Silverado - but it’s good of Ford to finally notice and incorporate them here. They might seem gimmicky, but they do actually make it easier to climb up and reach/step into the bed area, particularly for shorter owners. It’s certainly a safer option than standing on the rear tyre which is a WorkSafe comp claim begging to happen during your eight weeks off for recovery.
At the very least the step makes tying things down that bit safer.
Notice those indents on the doors? No, they haven’t been kicked in by an angry customer. They’re actually formed into the original panel stamping on purpose to hark back to the first of the T6 series Rangers. The embossed Ford lettering across the tailgate is also inspired by previous generations, including the F-150.
In this report we’ll draw a few comparisons to the Toyota Hilux (Rogue in particular) and the Mazda BT-50: full buyer’s guide here >>
You should also be aware that the ute primarily recommend, the Mitsubishi Triton, is about to be superseded by a new version in early 2024.
Also, this report will not be discussing the Ranger Raptor because that’s a largely specialised vehicle aimed more at performance than raw ute-based practicality. Chances are, if you’re thinking about a Raptor, you’ve probably already bought it.
But you can find out if Ranger Raptor is worse at towing than Wildtrak >> or whether the Raptor V6 will be reliable >>
FUNCTIONALITY
When carmakers try to impose their nice ideas into the cutthroat world of pure functionality, especially when it comes to no-nonsense trade vehicles, they rarely land. But Ranger does.
Often, what happens instead is the vehicle gets undermined by the lack of accountants understanding the importance of R&D to the consumer. The accounting department’s need to cut costs can, for example, on a Ranger ute might actually need to function and be capable of enduring the torture real tradies like you need to inflict upon the vehicle on the jobsite. But it seems this doesn’t appear to have happened with Ranger.
It remains to be seen how durable these features are in-service and in the longer-term, but overall there are some genuinely good ideas present in the Ranger - which haven’t become points of objective failure. Things such as integrated side steps (that don’t buckle under the load of the first carnivorous plumber) are a good idea in principle, but in practice you have to ask, ‘Are they actually wide enough for human feet?’ Often, a factory-issue side step is known in the 4WD community as ‘temporary’ for a reason.
However, the incorporation of an integrated and adjustable rack system is a good idea. It can be adjusted in longitudinal distance to the cab rear - brilliant. How many tradies have to pass through the Mitre 10 timber yard and tie down timber precariously balanced far too close to the centre of that mass on a Monday morning, only to stop halfway and re-tie them down? That’s if they don’t lose the load entirely once they hit the freeway.
In space usually reserved for a fuel tank, Ford has put under-seat storage compartments below the posteriors of row 2, which is good for stowing bits and bobs you might need on occasion that aren’t things you want within view of prying eyes - expensive tools like camera-based equipment, scanning or diagnostic gear, even laptops or laser tools used for surveyors and landscapers.
PAYLOAD
A subset of Ranger’s functionality is its ability to take serious amounts of payload. So let’s see what it can take and compare that with some of its immediate rivals like Hilux and BT-50. We’re using these two because the former is popular with excellent resale value, and the latter because there’s actually good stock available and it’s more affordable when purchased outright.
But we’ll also consider the dimensions because it’s not just about mass but about how practical the tray is. We’ll use the 3-litre V6 Wildtrak 4X4 as the yardstick.
Here’s my complete guide on GVM, payload and towing capacity limits >> if you need help with this stuff.
Ranger Wildtrak has a GVM of 3350kg, a kerb weight (incl. 80L of diesel) of 2384kg, leaving you with 1030kg of payload. Firstly, this is a 2.38-tonne vehicle without a single person or thing on board - that’s quite heavy. But it does have one advantage in making it a pretty stable heavy towing platform be default - but we’ll get into detail on that shortly.
It weighs 180kg (7 per cent) more than the Mazda BT-50 (using SP variant for this comparison based on price equivalency) and consumes 4 per cent more fuel on the combined cycle. The Wildtrak weighs 128kg (5 per cent) more than a Hilux Rogue but consumes the same 8.4 litres of diesel per 100km, based on the combined cycle test.
But Wildtrak smashes them both on potential payload, to the tune of 13 per cent more than the BT-50 and 17 per cent more than the Hilux. That’s 892kg on the BT and 854kg on the ‘Lux. That’s a 138kg advantage over the Mazda, and 176kg over the Toyota, or in units of measurement more illustrative that’s a difference of about 7-8 bags of concrete.
An aftermarket rubber or plastic try liner is probably a good idea in a scene like this, or at least an old roll of carpet.
Between the wheelarches, that Wildtrak tray has 1217mm (1.2 metres) to play with. It’s another advantage over the BT-50 of 97mm - to which many might think, ‘Whoop-di-doo’, and rightly so. A difference of 9.7cm isn’t exactly life or death, but it might make the difference if you have particularly rigid dimensions to account for, and that’s a usage case unique to your situation.
The Hilux has a tray, but Toyota Australia has done its level best to not bother publishing its official measurements, lest you do actual research and find out how utterly mediocre its product is. If you rip off the fake plastic mudguards on the Rogue and look at a stock SR5, you’ll see the whole vehicle is 1855mm wide (minus the door mirrors), so the correlating tray measurement between the wheelarches can’t be as good.
We can approximate a number by looking at the rear track (1570mm; measured front the centreline of the rear wheelhub) subtract half the tyre width of 265mm (132.5mm), but do it twice, leaving us with 1305mm approximately, between the wheelarches. But you also have to subtract the thickness of the steel tray, and space between it and the tyre, so this is very rough, but it gives you an idea that Wildtrak probably has an advantage over Hilux because otherwise, Toyota would present you and image like this:
Tray size: A CHEP square pallet (1165 x 1165mm) will fit. Euro pallet cited here is 1200 x 800mm.
Generally speaking, most vehicles are capable of accounting for the length, height and width of the 90th percentile customer, but if you’re particularly tall, toward the 6-foot-5 territory, and/or you’re the strictly carnivore type with frontal overhang of your own, Ranger is going to offer you the maximum cabin space required.
BT-50’s wheelbase is 3125mm, Hilux’s is 3085mm and thereby both fall short of Ranger’s 3270mm which translates into cabin space and legroom in particular.
ENGINE
Does more V6-derived power equal more towing capability? Yeah, it does. It means better control under swaying situations: you can accelerate sufficiently and gently enough to pull the combination into line in the event of sway. Pro Tip: Do not brake; you’ll make the swaying worse. Check out the anatomy of a towing disaster >> for more on that.
The additional weight of the bigger V6 also means better on-road, dynamic stability and a much lower potential for the trailer to push the vehicle around.
Ford revised the 2-litre biturbo for this model. However, instead of a power gain, commonly associated with model updates, this engine has actually lost power.
It used to develop 157kW in the PX-generation Ranger but is now tuned to produce 154kW/500Nm. While we can only speculate, what you could bet the farm on is that A) it was a deliberate choice, because there are no accidents in developing an engine to make less power than before, particularly when you can sell on it; and B) there is a specific reason for doing so, and the most likely scenario is emissions-related or reliability-related.
Going for the 3.0 V6 takes power up to 184kW, and, more importantly, 600Nm of torque. That latter figure is impressive for a dual-cab ute. In fact, it is the highest torque output of any dual-cab in its specific class, excluding the massive American pickups.
Performance is reasonably brisk in the 2.0L unit, for its class, and while the V6 is undoubtedly smoother and quieter, you might be disappointed by its lack of instant urgency, considering its output. It gets up and goes at a leisurely pace when pushed hard. But, it performs best in normal situations, where it can effortlessly steam ahead with its strong torque (because peak power is available quite low in the revs and has a wide range).
These engines are connected to an updated 10-speed automatic transmission and feed into two main four-wheel drive options. The 10-speed uses a new torque convertor and no longer mindlessly hunts around gears. Now, each gear is more decisively selected. Progression might not be quite as smooth but it’s a trade-off you’ll appreciate as the old model often felt like it was slipping gears.
XL and XLS models use a more conventional part-time four-wheel drive system, while the models above come with full-time four-wheel drive. A drive mode selector incorporates a new ‘4A’ mode in upper models as well, offering automatic drive control so it can be driven on tarmac with the safety of all-wheel drive.
TOWING
All of the main dual-cab models offer a 3500kg maximum braked towing rating, with payload capacities hovering around the 1000kg mark. The Raptor is restricted to 2500kg towing and 708kg payload due to its racing suspension.
But it needs to be reiterated that towing 3500kg with a dual-cab ute is dangerous >> It’s just less bad in a Ranger because of its overall 2.3t kerb weight being higher than its rivals. Translation: Ranger is more dynamically stable than lighter utes, and as a result, has a lower potential for the trailer to nudge it around, particularly at-speed in corners or going downhill.
Ranger Platinum (above) has a 3500kg braked capacity, as rated by Ford, but ill-advised by AutoExpert.
If you need a ute for specifically heavy towing assignments on a regular basis, you’d best be considering a Ranger thanks to its inherent dynamic stability as a 2.3 tonne vehicle out of the blocks, and that stonking V6 powerplant.
But if moderate towing is more in your line of work, around the 2000kg-2500kg towing requirements, a Mazda BT-50 is going to offer you a nicer cabin with just as many (or possibly more) features, a decent four-wheel drive system (albeit not as good as the Super Select II system in Triton) and you’ll save as much as $10,000 on the BT over Ranger.
If you are planning to tow more than three tonnes with a Ranger, you need to understand two things: 1. The anatomy of a towing disaster >>; and 2. What happens when extremely heavy towing goes wrong >>
TRANSMISSION
There are four driveline settings: 2H, 4A (can proportion different amounts of torque to the front and rear wheels), 4H (a 50:50 split front-rear), and 4L. Ranger gets a rear differential lock, and all 4X4 variants, regardless of spec-level, get a:
centre electromechanical transfer case (EMTC).
This provides that full-time 4X4 mode. But to provide the 50:50 drive split, Ford uses a set of clutch packs inside the EMTC to send torque to the front. It does not have a centre differential like in Mitsubishi Trion/Pajero Sport. But it is still a pretty clever design and works in the same way.
This 4A function on Ranger essentially means you can drive it in an all-wheel drive manner, in on-road situations like heavy rain while towing, for example. In these conditions, with a 2-tonne tool trailer on board, you absolutely want all four wheels working.
Rear-wheel drive in this scenario is less dynamically safe when cornering, overtaking or under hard braking, especially if you’re coming home in afternoon traffic, heavily fatigued and slow in your reaction time if something goes awry, down below.
Let’s be honest, these are the kinds of conditions you’re most likely to be presented with. Driving home in the dark, work trailer on the back, a bunch of stuff in the tray, you’ve been up since 5am and the heavens open up. Being able to have AWD operational on sealed roads (‘high traction surfaces’) with standing water, without damaging the transmission, could literally save your life.
The more primitive 4X4 utes like D-Max or Hilux cannot do this.
Just add water: one flick of the transmission and stability in wet conditions improves significantly
Ranger can perform in most difficult off-road terrain with features like an adjustable crawl speed, forward facing camera and a bunch of off-road traction control modes for varying environments like mud ruts, sand and ice/snow.
If you are doing light or even rurally-based moderate off-roading, some all-terrain tyres will be a necessity on those big, glitzy 21-inch alloy wheels on Platinum. You can option 18-inch wheels with all-terrain tyres on the upper-spec models.
Base model XL and XLS get 16-inch steel and alloy wheels respectively, XLT gets 17 inches in a dark grey metallic coating, the Sport gets 18-inch machine-faced alloys, Wildtrak gets the sexy charcoal metallic 18s or the Wildtrak X gets more knobbly General Grabber AT3 all-terrain tyres on 17-inch alloys, and the Platinum goes back up to 21-inch pimp-mobile alloys.
Each respective wheel set will change the off-road performance when it comes to touchdown angles front, rear and amidships, as well as for traction and ground clearance.
If you need to consider off-road recovery gear you might be surprised to learn why drag chain is better than a Snatch strap>>, and check out my deep-dive on had shackles versus soft shackles >>
Off road & manouvering
Ground clearance is 234mm on our yardstick Wildtrak - without any payload. That’s less than Toyota Hilux Rogue (265mm) and Isuzu D-Max X-Terrain or Mazda BT-50 SP (240mm), but more than current Triton GSR (220mm). It’s also less than LandCruiser 300 (245mm) or Nissan Patrol (272mm). But just remember this is a difference in millimetres, not centimetres. None of these vehicles can fit a standard primary school-issue 30cm rule vertically underneath it.
If you intend on fording streams or perform il-advised driving through floodwaters you get 800mm (80cm) of wading depth, the same as BT-50 and 100mm more than Hilux - but good luck distinguishing that margin with the naked eye from the high-and-dry road surface. Unless you intend to fit a snorkel and dive deep on a regular basis, you won’t need to worry about wading depth.
But approach, breakover and departure angles are important, because damage underneath is always a clear, present threat to both dignity and your chances of getting home. Ranger Wildtrak’s measurements are, according to Ford, 30 degrees on approach, 21 to break-over, and 23 degrees on departure. BT-50 beats it by a whisker on approach with 30.4 degrees, by a decent margin on 23.8 degrees to break-over, and by a nose on 24.2 degrees. And again, the Mazda is $5000 less.
Mind you, these numbers are skewed if you stick a towball on the back, or if you lower your tyre pressures.
Ranger Wildtrak riding on taller wheels like the 21s on the Platinum, obviously gains height and increases those angles, but do you really intend taking your $84,000 ute into these kinds of harsh driving conditions?
As for manoeuvrability, Ranger has a 12.9-metre turning circle compared with 12.6 on the Hilux and 12.4 metres on the BT-50.
I'll help you save thousands on a new Ford Ranger here
Just fill in this form. No more car dealership rip-offs. Greater transparency. Less stress.
INTERIOR
If you’re married to your LandCruiser 79 Series and will die on the premise that owning a ute needs to be a hard-plastic hell, you won’t like the new Ranger, or the next few paragraphs.
The interior of the latest Ranger has really stepped up from the last model, but it is clearly focused on practicality above all else. It’s not the most refined layout in this class. For example, it’d feel weird taking your grandmother to her friend’s funeral in the Ratpor. But the Wildtrak is the flagship model (aside from the Raptor) and so it is the most sophisticated. A Platinum variant was recently launched which goes for a more traditional luxury package - and it shows, markedly.
Leather-type upholstery presents well in the upright and utilitarian atmosphere. There is no hiding its tall-riding stance and workhorse pedigree, though. This is great and in-line with its intentions, as it feels robust and ready for work, but there are soft-touchpoints which will make it just a comfortable for the suits-in-utes buyers and the female buyers out there.
Having said that, hard-wearing surfaces are applied in the important areas, and there are more shelves on the dash and console than a Bunnings warehouse.
It’s all well and good to show off a big fancy touch-screen to your mates, and you’ll be pushed right to the top of the food chain with the Ranger as it has one of the biggest screens in the class. At 12 inches long, in the Wildtrak (optional in other models), this is an impressive display. However, user-friendliness is not ideal.
At times, it can be difficult to find your way around due to the lack of a main home button. And most pages and menus either pull up from the bottom or roll down from the top. It can feel like you’re reading a newspaper with 10 of the pages, at random, half-folded.
The best thing you can do is go sit in a Ranger at a dealership, without the sales guy, and try to perform some of those basic daily functions you would need it to do.
Connect your phone, make a call, play with the radio and bluetooth to play music, and see how easy or hard it is to turn things off that you might not want on - such as the lane-keeping or rear parking sensors while reversing a trailer.
Thankfully, Ford as put heat/air-conditioning and temperature controls below the central touchscreen in the form of buttons, instead of burying them in glitchy sub-menus within the screen. Common sense isn’t dead.
Having said this, there remains a gulf between Ford’s execution of a notionally premium interior and what Mazda accomplished on the BT-50. If you want a ute that’s going to feel some comfortable you don’t want to get out, I’d suggest sitting in the BT last - and you’ll save a few bucks over the Ranger.
Above is what they managed for the $77K Ranger Wildtrak, while below is what Mazda achieved on the BT-50 SP ($73K):
Wheelbase on Ranger is 3.27 metres, making it one of the longest in its class, and this translates into marginally more legroom than the BT-50 (pictured) on 3.12 metres and Hilux on 3.0 - but it’s hardly a country mile and negligible in the context of thousands of dollars’ difference in price.
As for Ranger’s practicality for family duties, it has missed an opportunity. The top tether anchor points for child restraints are fitted - like most of the competition - behind the seatback, as a loop welded to the rear cab’s structural section. So clipping those anchors into place couldn’t be harder. You have to release the seatback forwards (before putting the cumbersome restraint in the way) and offer yourself maximum slack in the strap in order to reach the anchor point.
Also, the seat bottom is one piece, so accessing those under-seat cubbies mentioned above, with a child restraint in place, is going to be nearly impossible.
You also cannot install a child restraint to the centre row 2 seating position because there is no top tether anchor point. This brings us neatly onto…
Crash safety
The current Ford Ranger was tested in 2022 and got a five-star rating, as did the Mazda BT-50, meaning they are both tested to the same protocols. The current-model Toyota Hilux is not, because it was tested back in 2019 to a different set of protocols.
So the 86 per cent score BT-50 earned in adult occupant protection (the primary destructive testing), and the 34 per cent Ranger earned, are far more relevant to you than the 96 per cent the Hilux scored over four years ago when it was kind of acceptable to not have ‘AEB Junction’ as part of the collision avoidance suite of tech.
On safety parameters, Hilux is incomparable and will be when it is replaced by a new model in 2025.
You can download the Ford Ranger crash test report here >>
RESALE VALUE, DEPRECIATION & DESIRABILITY
The sheer desirability of Ranger means it does a fairly good job maintaining its residual value. But for all of the appeal of a Wildtrak, Ranger won’t be quite as good as a Hilux for resale - but it’s not far off.
A 2022 Ranger Wildtrak sold for just over $70,000 (before on-road costs), and is estimated to have about 20,000-30,000km on it in 2023, almost doubling the average annual odometre reading. This is the nature of a light commercial passenger vehicle used heavily for trade work - lots of kays. It’s currently selling privately, according to Redbook.com.au, for about $64,000-$68,000. That’s a loss of about $2000-$6000 in 12 months, or about 2-8 per cent depreciation.
That’s not bad considering the king of resale value, the Toyota Hilux (in Rogue variant), is going for $65,000-$70,000 with the same odometer estimate and a pre-ORC price of $69,450 - or up to about 6 per cent in depreciation. And yes you read those numbers correctly - you could potentially make money selling your slightly used Hilux Rogue in 2023, owing to Toyota’s staggering inability to make enough vehicles.
Hilux and Ranger are neck-and-neck on resale value at the moment, with a cigarette paper separating them on price - but there’s a clear victor when it comes to raw sex appeal and breadth of capability. Nobody names their Hilux, but I’m sure there are a whole lotta Rosie Rangers out there, on jobsites across the country.
Make of that metaphor what you will.
DRAWBACKS
Australian motoring journalists generally review the Ranger with an undignified trouser tepee, typically because they need to keep their publication sweet with Ford as an advertiser.
Happily, that doesn’t apply here, so let’s look at the objective facts as to why you might cautiously back away from a Ranger - or at least go in with your eyes wide open and make an informed choice.
RELIABILITY
Snazzy, sexy tech isn’t exactly a Ford strong suit, historically. So it remains to be seen how well they’ve executed things like that enormous touchscreen or the more technical components. They’re hardly a market leader in reliability, but they’re far from terrible.
The first 12-18 months have found Ranger driveline vibrations, the previous iteration of the bi-turbo 2-litre 4-cylinder revealed it to be highly strung, and there was the 10-speed transmission gear hunting issue - but they have fixed those issues in-service.
Has Ford put too much faith in its big touchscreen centrepiece? It’s too early to tell, but that doesn’t mean it’s guaranteed to have issues.
The main reason these defects happen with Ford’s modern products is they tend to rush the R&D and react to issues (be they known or unknown to the company) once vehicles are already in the hands of customers. Having said that, it does seem like Ford has lifted its game in terms of getting Ranger to the top of the sales charts - it wouldn’t be there if it was a lemon, and it’s definitely not that.
There is one aspect to be wary of and that is…
CUSTOMER SUPPORT CULTURE
The primary reason for not singing praises and recommending a Ford Ranger has very little to do with the Ranger itself - in fact, I’d suggest nine Rangers out of 10 are probably going to be suitable to your needs and will be quite reliable enough.
There’s certainly no accusations here of Ranger being a Suzuki Jimny that belongs in a bygone era - Ranger is not that.
Customer support from Ford Australia has a track record of being average at customer care. It’s a cultural thing that generally manifests itself in the public domain when things go wrong. And the way Ford Australia handles customer complaints is pretty sub-standard. It just means you have to be a bigger voice for your consumer rights in the (admittedly rare) occasion something fails early or fails to work at all.
When there’s an opportunity to throw your consumer rights under the bus, you’d best be having every interaction with the service department and head office in writing - because you’ll probably need it if things get as far as a magistrate (however unlikely that may be). This is the level of customer interaction you don’t want to reach.
PRICE
Ranger is expensive and not by some slim margin - it’s several thousands of dollars more than equivalent Mazda BT-50 and will probably still be more than the new Mitsubishi Triton when it arrives. But on objective criteria, Triton has a better transmission and BT-50 has a better interior than the arguably overpriced Ranger. But they can’t do the pure grunt factor that Ranger can - and for many, that’s the job done.
A poverty pack Ranger XLS dual-cab 4X4 in glorious ‘fleet manager white’ (not the real colour name) wants $60,000 driveaway. For $60K you could have a outgoing-model Triton GSR or a mid-spec BT-50 XTR 4X4. This is just for comparison.
Wildtrak is $73,800 for the 2-litre bi-turbo, or $77,800 to tick the 3-litre V6 option - that’s a $4000 hike just to get an extra 34kW and 55kg in kerb weight. For that much dough you could pony up another $1000 for the full BT-50 ‘Thunder’, or simply save about $4K and settle for the SP which has all the fruit you could possibly want in a ute.
But if you haul big, heavy stuff five days a week, at least you’re getting the grunt you’re paying for.
CONCLUSION
Don’t misunderstand me here - I do want to love Ranger, and that honking V6 diesel does make it a heavy towing weapon - which is why it’s here. Even I want to tow something with a Wildtrak.
My problem is Ford struggles at the final hurdle in R&D, which can lead to gremlins down the line once customers like you start to take ownership and get stuck into using it.
This would be okay if Ford Australia was monumentally awesome at customer care and they routinely turned your frown upside down the moment you stepped foot in the dealership. Except that’s not always what happens, so be wary of Ford simply brushing you aside - and don’t let them.
The majority of Rangers are going to be fine and you’re probably going to enjoy it.
Shopping for a big seven-seat SUV or eight-seat people mover? Kia Carnival might be king of triplet transport, but the Hyundai Staria is built for massive families and small business…