Ford Ranger ratios

[MYOB]

Hi

I've got my eye on a vehicle but it has been opted with an increased in ratios from 3.15 to 3.73. This was done by Ford and is covered by their warranty.

I understand the mpg will be affected and it will run at a higher rpm at higher speed.

I have a very specific set of criteria and this is the only vehicle available that fits my criteria.

I'll not be towing so I don't need the increase in ratios. My question is, would the fuel economy and higher rpm at high speed only have a marginal affect?

I understand the higher ratios may be useful for rural and urban driving though with a bit more acceleration.

Thanks

[powerstroke]

MYOB said:

Hi

I've got my eye on a vehicle but it has been opted with an increased in ratios from 3.15 to 3.73. This was done by Ford and is covered by their warranty.

I understand the mpg will be affected and it will run at a higher rpm at higher speed.

I have a very specific set of criteria and this is the only vehicle available that fits my criteria.

I'll not be towing so I don't need the increase in ratios. My question is, would the fuel economy and higher rpm at high speed only have a marginal affect?

I understand the higher ratios may be useful for rural and urban driving though with a bit more acceleration.

Thanks

If you do a lot of motorway driving and don't tow then the lower gearing won't be ideal .. I've found .when you're running most diesels over about 2000 RPM the economy really drops off ....IMHO ... however lower gearing will make it feel more responsive ..

[MYOB]

Thanks. Yes, I understand that but was rather hoping someone could advise specifically on the 3.73 gearing on the Ranger.

I only test drove it on local roads. Ideally I need to go back and test it at higher speed but it's a long way away!

[MYOB]

Been looking at specs on Ford website. Seems the salesman got it wrong.

The manual version has a ratio of 3.15 but the auto has a 3.73 ratio as standard, and the rpm is 2500 at 70mph.

[twing]

MYOB said:

Been looking at specs on Ford website. Seems the salesman got it wrong.

The manual version has a ratio of 3.15 but the auto has a 3.73 ratio as standard, and the rpm is 2500 at 70mph.

Are you sure? I've got 3 munuals here, all 3.55. I don't have an auto atm to check

[MYOB]

twing said:

Are you sure? I've got 3 munuals here, all 3.55. I don't have an auto atm to check

According to the specs on Ford website, the 3.15 ratio is standard on the 2.2L Ranger, with the 3.73 ratio standard on the auto.

However, when buying brand new, it's possible to spec different ratios. So the used Rangers appear to have a range of different ratios!

This is what I've garnered from reading online but if you understand differently, I'm happy to be corrected!

[twing]

MYOB said:

According to the specs on Ford website, the 3.15 ratio is standard on the 2.2L Ranger, with the 3.73 ratio standard on the auto.

However, when buying brand new, it's possible to spec different ratios. So the used Rangers appear to have a range of different ratios!

This is what I've garnered from reading online but if you understand differently, I'm happy to be corrected!

You may be right about changing the ratios but odd that all of mine are 3.55, I'll keep checking as we get more in

[pembo]

How do you find out what ratio it is then? I didn't realise this was a thing, we are looking to get a ranger for the wife, she will be carrying bulk but not much weight so a more economical ratio would make sense. We took one out for a 48 hr test drive last week and managed 35 mpg over her route, which is about what we expected, so if it's possible to get better than that with a 2.2 and an economy axle it would be pretty handy

[MYOB]

pembo said:

How do you find out what ratio it is then? I didn't realise this was a thing, we are looking to get a ranger for the wife, she will be carrying bulk but not much weight so a more economical ratio would make sense. We took one out for a 48 hr test drive last week and managed 35 mpg over her route, which is about what we expected, so if it's possible to get better than that with a 2.2 and an economy axle it would be pretty handy

No idea - I know there's a way to determine it by looking at the axle but I cannot recall.

It's all news to me too but if you got 35mpg on the 48hr test drive, and it wasn't revving high as motorway speed, then it's probably stock ratio.

[pembo]

Yeh it lined up with the quoted figures which was surprising but will still be a bit of a difference from the 60mpg we get at the moment (not in a truck)

[MYOB]

pembo said:

Yeh it lined up with the quoted figures which was surprising but will still be a bit of a difference from the 60mpg we get at the moment (not in a truck)

But if you're worrying about fuel economy, don't look at pickups!

But the Ranger is worth losing nearly 30mpg...

[pembo]

It's factored into the business model so not a worry, just not what I've gotten used to.
It's between the Ranger, Amarok and Dmax at the moment, the wife prefers the VW but randomly suggested the Isuzu today

[MYOB]

pembo said:

It's factored into the business model so not a worry, just not what I've gotten used to.
It's between the Ranger, Amarok and Dmax at the moment, the wife prefers the VW but randomly suggested the Isuzu today

A relative of mine works at VW Commercial and his customers prefer the Ranger. Says it's more comfortable.

Not tried the D-max but have heard positive things about them. Not many of them available where I live. Great reliability although more off road biased.

[twing]

pembo said:

How do you find out what ratio it is then? I didn't realise this was a thing, we are looking to get a ranger for the wife, she will be carrying bulk but not much weight so a more economical ratio would make sense. We took one out for a 48 hr test drive last week and managed 35 mpg over her route, which is about what we expected, so if it's possible to get better than that with a 2.2 and an economy axle it would be pretty handy

I'm using Ford ETIS but you need user name/password to get on it