ausrutherford Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Up to 27 now on the highway. http://www.fordvehicles.com/trucks/ranger/ was 26 last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 (edited) Nope, didn't notice that. I wonder how? Edited October 8, 2009 by rmc523 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Tired, Drive by wire? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-150 Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 maybe the standard rear axle has been changed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 maybe the standard rear axle has been changed That is how they did it on the F-150. It wouldn't surprise me if that is how they did it here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaydez Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Could also be new, low rolling resitance tires. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sixt9coug Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 My Ranger is a 4.0L and it has 3.55 gears. I wish they at least offered 3.73s or 4.10s with the 2wd. I dont like the 3.55s and its not like the milage is really that great out of it anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevys Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 maybe the standard rear axle has been changed Under build and price it still shows 3.73 as standard on the 5 speeds which is what its always been so they found something besided a gear change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old_fairmont_wagon Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Its a highway change, the biggest areas affectings that are... 1) aero (I don't imagine they've changed anything on the outside of the ranger) 2) Gearing (again, no apparent change) 3) Tire Rolling resistance (could have changed, don't know) 4) Engine Tune (perhaps electronic throttle control, new tune or ECU program) 5) Weight (way down on the list, but, I doubt they've lightened the vehicle any) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpvbs Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 I remember a couple of years ago a panther engineer said they switched the panther rear ends over to synthetic gear oil because it improved the MPG by some measurable amount on the EPA test. They also tried the same with the transmission and mpg also increased measurably but because of the quantity of fluid needed in the trans, it wasn't cost effective. So synthetic fluids could be a possible explanation for the Ranger as well. They didn't really need to gain a whole 1 mpg, but gain just enough to round up to 27 instead of down to 26. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.