Well, I've gone and done it.....

[harringtondav]

The old '99 Durango was a faithful boat hauler, but at 21 yrs old it was getting a little rough on the outside.
Wife said she wanted a truck to simplify yard waste transport to the municipal drop off yard. (Thank you - thank you God).

I went with the Ford Ranger and its 2.3L turbo. Hard to believe, but it's rated at 7500# towing, nearly 3000# more than the 5.2L Dodge.

Ford and dealer incentives on 2019s got me a nicely optioned truck for nearly $6K less than I could have paid for a bare bones 2020 Ranger or F150. Also decent gas mileage.

But with that 7500# towing, two footitus is getting worse, so that savings may not last long.

 

[dingbat]

Hard to believe, but it's rated at 7500# towing

Only if equipped with the optional (53R) trailer towing package.

Played that game when I bought my F150 this Spring. Was looking for a truck with the Max. Tow package (#11,400). Was told by more than one dealer that the truck they had in stock had a "tow package". After a couple of disappointing trips, started asking them for specific option codes. Took a while to find one properly equipped

Congrats on the new truck

 

[tpenfield]

Yes, you definitely have to start looking at 'new'/bigger boats.

 

[alldodge]

2.3 turbo vs 5.2 - There has never been no replacement for displacement so far as my pea brain knows

Nice truck, and hope it does you a great job and many years of service

 

[racerone]

Does your wife have a sister ??

 

[Scott Danforth]

the durango towing capacity was based on gear ratio and they were conservative

Durango 4.7 V-8 4,750 b,d
Durango 4.7 V-8 6,050 a,b
Durango 5.2 V-8 4,700 b,d
Durango 5.2 V-8 6,000 a,b
Durango 5.9 V-8 5,950 b,d
Durango 5.9 V-8 7,650 a,b
Durango 4WD 4.7 V-8 4,450 b,d
Durango 4WD 4.7 V-8 5,750 a,b
Durango 4WD 5.9 V-8 5,650 b,d
Durango 4WD 5.9 V-8 7,350 a,b

a Requires 3.92:1 axle ratio.
b Requires four-speed automatic overdrive transmission.
d Requires 3.55:1 axle ratio.

The ranger I agree, does look a lot better than a 21 year old durango. I would be cautious towing 7500# with the Ranger.

the towing capacity is only 3500 unless it has the 53R towing package https://www.ford.com/cmslibs/conten.../pdf/guides/19Towing_Ford_Ranger_r1_Jan29.pdf

 

[harringtondav]

Thanks all. My "gotta have" list for a 2020 order in was simple: XLT. Tow pkg. Locking rear diff. Nothing else. Without the incentives I'd have arm wrestled for invoice - 2 or 3%. The dealer located truck had my color, tow pkg, FX4 off road pkg which includes locking diff, plus other gizmos for less than I'd have paid for the bare bones 2020.

I'm looking at a Chaparral 21 SSi. O'l faithful Durango would have done fine on the straightaways, but it wheezed in and out of final steep Miss river grades close to our river place with 3200# on the tongue with my Larson. I suspect the Ranger won't wheeze, but I expect to see that 10 spd tranny revving the engine on the steeper ones. Thinking the Chaparral may add 800-1000# with gear. Long transport and those grades are a twice yearly thing, so I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

BTW - I crowed too soon about the $$ in my pocket. I just ordered $1300 plus in seat covers (tan seats with a dog), drop in bed liner and hard alum locking tonneau. The bleeding will stop with Husky floor mats. Then I bleed more with a new boat.

 

[dingbat]

2.3 turbo vs 5.2 - There has never been no replacement for displacement so far as my pea brain knows

Until turbo charging arrived in the scene.

The 3.5 turbo puts out 365 hp, 420 lb⋅ft with a stock tune. 460+ HP tuned up

 

[alldodge]

Until turbo charging arrived in the scene.

The 3.5 turbo puts out 365 hp, 420 lb⋅ft with a stock tune. 460+ HP tuned up

That's funny

 

[JASinIL2006]

Yeah, the 3.5L Ecoboost twin turbo V6 beats the 5.0L V8 in both torque and horsepower, not by a lot, but it beats it. The 2.7L and 2.3L aren't bad, either. I'm not sure I'd be too comfortable towing a 21' foot boat regularly and for long distances with a Ranger, but it's a surprisingly capable truck.

I almost went with the 3.5L EB V6 in my F150, but ultimately, the reliability of V8 over turbo-charged V6s won me over. Both engines have a ton of power.

 

[harringtondav]

Does your wife have a sister ??

Actually she has six. Personally, it would take a very, very nice truck to put up with any of them.

 

[Scott Danforth]

Actually she has six. Personally, it would take a very, very nice truck to put up with any of them.

LMAO.....:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

 

[dingbat]

Yeah, the 3.5L Ecoboost twin turbo V6 beats the 5.0L V8 in both torque and horsepower, not by a lot, but it beats it.

Peak numbers are similar but the two motors are very different in how they deliver that power.

Having towed with both motors, the 3.5 is by far the better of the two motors

 

[H20Rat]

2.3 turbo vs 5.2 - There has never been no replacement for displacement so far as my pea brain knows

Turbo's are fun little creatures to stick under the hood! If I showed you two dyno graphs, one putting out 258 ft/lb of torque at 2000 rpm, and one putting out about 75 ft/lb at 2100. Which one is the 5.0l V8 and which is the turbo 2.0l?

Turbo's aren't a replacement for displacement, they ARE displacement. To make power you need to burn a quantity of fuel and air, with air being the limiter. To burn more air, you can either make a bigger cylinder, or just shove more air in there. Shoving 14.7 PSI of air down the engine means you are roughly doubling the displacement, without increasing the frictional drag.

 

[alldodge]

Yes, the turbo must be spun up to start making power

 

[harringtondav]

Turbo's are fun little creatures to stick under the hood! If I showed you two dyno graphs, one putting out 258 ft/lb of torque at 2000 rpm, and one putting out about 75 ft/lb at 2100. Which one is the 5.0l V8 and which is the turbo 2.0l?

Turbo's aren't a replacement for displacement, they ARE displacement. To make power you need to burn a quantity of fuel and air, with air being the limiter. To burn more air, you can either make a bigger cylinder, or just shove more air in there. Shoving 14.7 PSI of air down the engine means you are roughly doubling the displacement, without increasing the frictional drag.

I'm in the turbo camp. Our little Dart Areo 1.3L Turbo hits max torque of 184 ft/lb at 2400 rpm and stays there til around 4400 rpm. If I want to slingshot around someone I paddle shift to lock the DDCT tranny - prevent unnecessary downshift - and stomp on it. Whoosh.

The image below is from my decision spreadsheet for trucks in this class. Data from mfg. website or KBB. Toyota Tacoma and Colorado are naturally aspirated V6s around 3.5L. The Ranger is a 2.3L turbo. Nice 2019 Ranger incentives sealed the deal.

If the Colorado's 2.4L diesel was packaged in SuperCrew/two door I'd have looked closer. I only take one 212 mile round trip with the boat, so I'm not too worried...even I get that 21' Chaparral.

 

[Harritwo]

The 2.7L Ecoboost towed my 94 Sea Ray 170 easy Didnt know it was there. I bought the 06 Sea Ray 195, Decided it needed a new tow Truck.. Bought the 19 F150 with the 3.5L ecoboost.. Both these truck outperform my 5.4L in every aspect, I loved that 5.4L It was built and tuned, and the 3.5l still outperforms it anyway i want.

 

[Toyelectroman]

Me and the wife were shopping for a new truck last month and we narrowed it down between ranger vs tacoma. It was a tuff call as i am a Toyota fan but the ranger really impressed me as i felt the performance and the room in the backseat was better. It was going to be her daily driver so we the tacoma but i would have been happy with either

 

[jimmbo]

A tiny engine with a Turbo... I wonder how the bottom end holds up after many miles of towing, running with boost to be able to make the torque needed for towing? Does it have larger Con Rod Bearings vs. a non Turbo version. What is the Oil Change Interval for that kind of Duty? I will assume Synthetic is required. Myself, I prefer more displacement. and lower rpms

 

[dingbat]

A tiny engine with a Turbo... I wonder how the bottom end holds up after many miles of towing, running with boost to be able to make the torque needed for towing?

The EcoBoost V6 was first available in the F150 was 2011. Problems in the lower end surely would have shown up by now.

What is the Oil Change Interval for that kind of Duty?

The manual states oil changes with intelligent oil light warning, 10,000 miles or 1 year, whichever comes first. My IOL went 7.2K miles on my first oil change. Synthetics are not required.

Myself, I prefer more displacement. and lower rpms

If you prefer lower rpms, then the EB is right up your alley. The EB peaks in both torque and HP at much lower RPM than the V8.

I'm pulling roughly #6K. The V8 (5.3) I had before would downshift and jump up to 4K rpm to get up the hill at the bottom of our road. The EB pulls the same hill under 2500 rpm. The two motor are not in the same league when it comes to low end torque

https://www.motorreviewer.com/engine.php?engine_id=144

"Based on independent research, the engine has good longevity if owners precisely follow the maintenance schedule and use the recommended oil. Average trouble-free mileage for the 3.5 EcoBoost engine is about 200k miles, after that it all becomes individual."