21 Ford Ranger Reviews
The following are reviews placed by our customers for the Ford Ranger. These do not neccessarily represent the views of pickup trucks direct. Please contact us if you would like to talk about the pickup truck that best suits you.
Paul Billingsley said on June 29 2010
XL Double Cab - Good truck, let down with poor running gear. The clutch and gear box are not up to towing 3 tons.
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
Mark Brittin said on June 25 2010
XL Double Cab - Great truck, we are very happy with it.
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
Clive Wellman said on June 22 2010
Wildtrak - Generally happy, although it does not like to start in the cold weather.
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
Andrew Fairhurst said on June 22 2010
Thunder Manual - Great
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
Martin McCloud said on June 16 2010
Thunder Manual - The vehicle feels a little top heavy and is also heavy on fuel.
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
Darren Smith said on June 14 2010
Thunder Manual - Good machine, which does a good job.
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
Carl Richard Ramsey-Bennett said on January 15 2010
Thunder Manual - I didn't know pick-ups were made like this. It drives like a good car in terms of driver comfort. We drove to Scotland and back in comfort. The seats are not Mercedes quality, but they are better than Volvo. I would like more MPG, but it gives around 30mpg, which is what I expected. Fuel economy is about 40 miles per tank better on a long run.
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
Rodger Hitchcock said on January 14 2010
Thunder Manual - Great vechile and sad to have to pass it onto my new contracts manager I will be buying a car this time round
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
Anthony Wiseman said on January 14 2010
Thunder Automatic - Good pickup, but poor fuel consumption
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
Denzil Williams said on January 14 2010
Thunder Manual - Very comfortable to drive had 2 weeks around France, a bit thirsty on diesel.
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
peter wrycraft said on January 14 2010
Thunder Manual - I love thsi vehicle and would (and hopefully will) have another of the same make & type once the present vehicle is 3 years old.
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
NORMAN TUFFIN said on January 14 2010
Thunder Manual - GREAT
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
Paul Jacobs said on January 14 2010
Thunder Manual - Good vehicle for what it is. Fuel economy not the best but that is to be expected for this type of vehicle.
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
Dean Dyer said on December 19 2009
Thunder Manual - Its a pleasure in all respects.
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
Robert Prior said on December 18 2009
Thunder Manual - Great improvement and great value
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
Phil Gunby said on December 18 2009
Thunder Manual - i am very pleased with the truck it does everything i require,plenty of room in the rear and also room to fit the 2 kids in the back seats,one thing thats not great is the asx hardtop does tend to leak around the edges when it rains,but overall a nice truck.
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
wayne bardell said on December 18 2009
Thunder Manual - Best looking truck around. Not very good on fuel compared to l200 but still worth the choice.
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
Nick Crawford said on December 18 2009
Thunder Manual - The truck is fantastic and i would recomend to anyone. It is great for business and also as a family car. The build quality is unbelievable and the looks are perfect.
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
Pat Phillips-Jones said on December 18 2009
Thunder Manual - Love it much better than my previous one for performance, fuel economy and comfort.
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
Wayne Evans said on December 18 2009
Thunder Manual - Over all very good. Slightly down on power (due to turbo lag) and a very lively rear end. Rear seating is a little cramped and the beeping when you leave the keys in the ignition is very annoying.
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
John Rae said on December 18 2009
Thunder Manual - Compared to my last vehicle, the Ford Ranger is fantastic.
Vehicle Ratings
- Handling:
- Comfort:
- Quality:
- Reliability:
- Performance:
- Practicality:
- Running Costs:
- Value for Money:
