Sevensecondsuv

Yeah but those crash tests don't hit the windsheild/A-pillars with a 1200 lb weight, they hit the bumper. A hyundai would probably be OK hitting a 1200 lb mass in the bumper. Any other car would have had the roof/pillars/glass torn off in such an accident. The only reason my mom is alive is because panthers are built like tanks. Now she refuses to drive anything else (which is ironic because she denouced it as a "granny car" when we first got it). Besides that, the Crown Vics are SOOOOO much better looking than any of the D3 models. I do like the 3.5 out of the D3's though, I'm contemplating swapping one into a crown vic for my next daily driver. It'd be nice to find a manual tranny to throw in it as well...

My mom slammed her old 1999 panther into a 1200 lb black angus cow at 50 mph last november. It was night on a country back road, that's why she didn't see it. The 1200 lb cow landed on the hood, ramped off the A pillars, and landed on the back part of the roof and rolled off the trunk lid. Again this all happened at 50 mph. My mom survived without a scratch. If the air bags hadn't gone off, I would have replaced the grille, hood, headlight, and front and rear windsheilds and still be driving the car to this day. Even after having a 1200 lb cow slam into the windshield/A-pillars at 50 mph, YOU COULD STILL OPEN ALL FOUR DOORS AS IF IT HAD NEVER HAPPENED! So after having that experience with a panther, I'm going to say that anyone who tries to tell it's not the safest car on the road is full of ****. I'll believe a D3 is as good when I see it stand up to something like that as well as a panther. And the car had 190,000 miles on it at that point with nothing more than regular maintenance. My 90 ranger currently has 255,000 miles on it with all major original parts, and it runs as nice as any new vehicle. So much for the "panther and ranger being the least reliable vehicles Ford makes". It's been my experience that the panther and ranger platform are the most reliable vehicles Ford makes bar none. As far as Ford building the Ranger for a while longer, that's great news. After owning 2 older ones, this gives me a chance to buy a new one (something I've always wanted to do) after college before they quit making them.

I agree with the POS route. Save your money for things that won't depreciate as you drive them. That ranger would make an excelent first vehicle. Ranger's are nearly indestructable, get reasonably good mileage, are super easy to work on (electronics and hoses and all), and parts are a dime a dozen. I've rebuilt 'em from the ground up and there isn't hardly a part that cost's more than $200 on those things ($50 if you go the junkyard route). As you stated, an 01-03 LS isn't exactly new, so you'll even be looking at fixing that. Given the LS's relative rarity and the fact that it is a Lincoln without a direct Ford counterpart, parts and service will be much more expensive than a ranger. Panther's are also an excelent choice. If you can't get the granny car image out of your head, go look at 03-04 Mercury Marauders. Get an 98-03 crown vic, install a set of explorer 17" wheels, put a flowmaster dual exhaust system with long chrome tips, and put a nice set of leather buckets in it and no one will call it a granny car. Anyways, that's just my $0.03 (inflation). Oh, and BTW I'm 22.

My 1990 ranger has lived in the salty upper midwest for it's whole life. The structural integrity of the frame is still perfect. Toyota has been having problems with their truck frames since the time they started making trucks. Why people keep buying them is beyond me. I know some people just like smaller trucks, but even then the Ford Ranger is every bit as reliable as any old taco out there and it doesn't have splitting in half problems. I've seen plenty of rangers with over 300000 miles on 'em and even a few with 1,000,000 plus. I guess some people just want to see the American manufacturers out of business, even if they have a better product. On a side note, I Ford should launch an advertising program giving a $2000 incentive on a new F-150 or Ranger to people that got their taco's bought back by toyota. Ford needs to go on the offensive here.

Yeah, ford made a mistake replacing the 2.9L with the 3.0L in the ranger back in 1991. I have a 1990 2wd 2.9L and it consistantly does 23 MPG with 130,000 miles on it. People I know with far newer 3.0's can barely do as good on gas as my 92 4.0L 4x4 explorer (17-20). The only way a 3.0 isn't gutless is when it's running at 3000+ RPM. That means 4.10 gears are a must for 2wd's and 4.56's for 4x4s. Personally I'll just stick with my other 1990 ranger complete with the 2.3L lima and 5-spd. 250,000 miles, gets 25+ mpg, and runs as good as the brand new Focus I rented for a week while on vacation (which was by far the nicest small car I've ever driven. I think I might buy my fiance one over the summer). My 2.3 ranger still has at least another 250,000 in it, but if I get sick of it or hit a deer or something, I'll probably get a new 2.3 duratech ranger. Although I would love to see Ford put the D35 in them too!

I can't wait to crush one of them things with my old exploder complete with a 200 lb steel pipe bumper. I just hope the driver doesn't die in the process. Ha! That's funny. My front bumper weighs 1/9 what his complete car weighs.... :lol:

Those CV's are tough cars. My mom recently hit a cow in her '99. Yes I said a 1200 pound black angus cow. She was going about 50 MPH and walked away without a scratch. The cow rolled right over the roof structure and off the trunk lid. The car did not deform at all. All it needed was new glass, a grille, hood, headlight, and side mirror and I could have been driving it again. I knew these things were tanks, but I was absolutely amazed at how well it stood up to such a wreck. The police officer who did the accident report said she was lucky that she was driving a crown vic, then he went on to express his displeasure with the department's discision to have him driving an impala and said that he wished he could be driving a crown vic. BTW, it had 175,000 miles on it with very little basic maintenance and it ran just like it was new. The CV's have quite a reputation that dodge, chevy, or who ever else tries to build a cop car will have a hard time overcoming.

You're ready to burn ford because you got a car with a poorly designed intake manifold? I for one would need a better reason. Seriously, just order the aftermarket manifold from summit (it's like $200, and is made of aluminum where the OEM ones crack) and spend the 3 hours installing it. I've done one before, it's not that hard. I think a $200, 3 hour repair isn't much at all for a vehicle I like driving. Anyways, good luck with the toyota you'll end up in. I'm sure they'll be much more responsive to their non-shifting transmissions, weak frames, sludged-up engines, and camshaft failures. I guess some people just have too much time on their hands and like to waste it complaining on internet forums that will get them nowhere.

You got a reference for that? I've known plenty of people with crown vic's 92-07 and not one of them has ever rebuilt a tranny, much less even had a tranny problem. My personal CV, a '99, has 170,000 on it and shifts like new. On the other hand, the camry owners I know have not been so lucky!

As we all know, the Ranger is coming to a crossroads with it's only assembly plant closing next year. Ford could let it die, move production elsewhere, or redesign the Ranger. Moving production elsewhere and keeping the current model is just a waste of money. Current sales level wouldn't justify it. In my onpinion, killing your lone small fuel efficient truck when gas is staying above $3.00 a gallon is equally as stupid. That would amount to nothing more than losing more sales to Toyota. That leaves one option: Come out with the Next Ranger. Here are what I'd like to see: 1. The size should be no bigger than it is now. The ranger is in a class of it's own and that's a good thing. 2. Get rid of the Sport Track and offer the ranger in regular cab, super cab, and crew cab (albeit a very short bed) models. 3. Keep the truck body on frame and rear wheel drive with a solid rear axle. It can't really be a truck if it doesn't have these three things. If we wanted a front-drive unibody with IRS we'd buy a Honda Ridgeline. 4. Keep the truck simple and user-friendly to work on. Also keep parts cheap. This is one of the best things about the current Ranger. 5. Make the interior nice but also make it so that it will hold up to 500,000 miles of use. 6. Share the platform with the Escape and maybe even a new 2 door SUV, the Bronco, in the interest of cutting down on platforms and saving money. Maybe even make a small van based off the Ranger. There is definately a market for a small tough fleet delivery vehicle. But by all means keep the rear drive body on frame construction for the Ranger and Bronco. It would be sad if my 92 explorer could out 4-wheel the new Bronco. 7. Offer lots of different engine choices. I'd like to see the 4-cylinder, the 3.5 duratech, a small turbo diesel, and maybe even the 4v 4.6L V8 on selected models. Just don't increase the size of the vehicle in the process! People have been putting 4.6L and 5.0L V8's in the current Ranger for years, we know a V8 will fit. 8. Offer a manual transmission with every engine in every model. Of course make an automatic availible, but have the option for a manual. The younger generation loves manual transmissions. It is important to have them availible if you're going to attract younger buyers. Besides that, the words Ranger and Manual Transmission are synonymous. This will be good for gas mileage as well. 8. Gas mileage needs to go up. I'd like to see the diesel and 4-cylinder average 30 MPG and the 3.5L average 22-25 MPG. My 1990 2.3L 4-cylinder Ranger averages 25 MPG. 18 years later 30 MPG should definately be possible. 9. Ford has an excellent brand name with the Ranger. Definately use that in marketing the new Ranger. 10. Keep pricing low enough to make a Ranger a really good value. The pricing needs to stay below the F-150 if your going to sell them on anything more than gas mileage. I'd like to see the base 4-cyl regular cab 2wd with a MSRP of 13-14k. Even the optioned-up crew cab 4x4 with the big engine should go for no more than 27k. 11. Above all else, the new Ranger has to follow in the current Ranger's ability to take hard abuse and just keep on running for many miles. I have 235,000 miles on my 1990 Ranger and it's showing no signs of quitting any time soon. I trust it as much as I would a brand new one. I know several people with more than 500,000 miles on Rangers and a few with over a million miles on a Ranger. The new Ranger must really be "Built Ford Tough". I'd really like to see a revamped Ranger soon. I think it's a great idea and if done right, could really be a winner for Ford Motor when they need it most.