Questions About Your Experiences With Ford Ranger 2.2

[livinthailandos]

First I want to mention that Im driving a ford
ranger 2.2 4X4. Right now I’m adjusting to this new truck and have notice at
least one main thing, to really get this truck moving requires pushing a
minimum 2,000 rpm otherwise under 2,000 rpm it hardly gets up and go, the truck
moves quite slow. During this short time it feels similar to driving a 4
Cylinder car with only 90 Horsepower. By the way I know trucks are not meant
for speed, unless they have more horsepower and are at least 6 cylinder. Just
wondering if everyone else has this same experience.

Not happen to me but on another forum regarding
the 2.2 ranger I had read this -The body skins are like silly putty IMHO and
susceptible to deformations from all sorts of low-velocity impacts. For any of
you is this true or happen to you as well?

Regarding 2H / 4H / 4L – can any of you explain
the differences to me in terms of which one to use on which road situation or which
one to use when going up a mountain.

[Jitar]

Pickup trucks are not good at drag races but most cars do not go that well under 2,000 rpm either. Your 4x4 Ranger is probably close to 2 tonnes empty so 150 hp can only do so much. The diesel will cruise and pull up hills nicely though.

Your handbook should tell you:

2H = rear wheel drive. Use when driving on surfaces with grip like bitumen / concrete etc.

4H = 4 wheel drive, high range. Can be used when driving on loose, slippery or steep surfaces like gravel, mud, sand etc.

4L = 4 wheel drive, low range. Can be used when driving at low speed on loose or slippery surfaces like gravel, mud, sand etc. Especially useful if climbing or descending steep slopes, very rough ground, maneuvering heavy trailers.

Do not use 4H or 4L on hard surfaces with good grip.

[IMHO]

Well, your gut feel is about right - at 1900 RPM the Ford 2.2L makes 100HP:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/505429-2012-model-pickup-trucks/?p=4768251

Edited May 14, 2013 by IMHO

[transam]

Look at the HP/TQ numbers for the 2.2. It is a slug.

[Jitar]

TA, have another look at the charts IMHO linked. The Ford 2.2L engine's power and torque are as slug like as the other 2.5L pickup engines.

Considering it is the smallest displacement, 150 hp and 375 Nm compare well to say a 2.5L Hilux with 120 hp and 325 Nm.

[transam]

TA, have another look at the charts IMHO linked. The Ford 2.2L engine's power and torque are as slug like as the other 2.5L pickup engines.

Considering it is the smallest displacement, 150 hp and 375 Nm compare well to say a 2.5L Hilux with 120 hp and 325 Nm.

Have a look at the rpm for the specs. 3.0 Toyota is streets head. Forget the 2.5 Toyota. If I was looking for a Ford it would only be the 3.2. My Toyo I cruise at 1500-1800rpm

Look where the torque is usable on these rides.

[Jitar]

TA, My point was the Ford 2.2L is OK for what it is.

For the more powerful pickups the 3.0L Toyota D4D engine is very good and its low speed torque is exceptional. The competitors like the Mitsu will cruise along at 1,500 to 1800 rpm as well but the Toyota does it a little better. However the Toyota looses out when pushed hard at 3,500 - 4,000 rpm, can't have it both ways. The difference doesn't amount to much with an auto tranny.

I've not driven a 3.2L Ranger but assuming MRO's graphs are correct, the 3.0L Toyota only has an advantage below 1,100 rpm, above that the 3.2L Ford is way ahead in power and torque. Problem is no one seems to be able to get Ford to deliver one.

Edited May 15, 2013 by Jitar

[transam]

My point was the Ford 2.2L is OK for what it is.

The bigger engine options are a slightly different market. The 3.0L Toyota D4D engine is very good but it's competition will cruise along at 1,500 to 1800 rpm as well. The Toyota does it a little better than say the Mitsu but it looses out when pushed hard at 3,500 - 4,000 rpm, can't have it both ways. I've not driven a 3.2L Ranger but assuming MRO's graphs are correct, the 3.0L Toyota only has an advantage below 1,100 rpm, above that the 3.2L Ford is way ahead in power and torque. Problem is no one seems to be able to get Ford to deliver one.

Thought we were talking about the Ford 2.2 slug.

[Jitar]

We were until your post #6

Edited May 15, 2013 by Jitar

[transam]

We were until your post #6

The topic is about a 2.2. Yes/No. It is a slug Yes/No.

Advertised low HP. 2.2 @3700 rpm

much higher HP 3.2 @ 3000rpm

The 2.2 is a slug. Who on earth revs stuff to that rpm on a work horse when better stuff out there.?

[stevenl]

Drive it first, and you'll see it is not a slug.

[transam]

Drive it first, and you'll see it is not a slug.

So the figures lie ? Hmmmmmm, the 3.2 is therefore a drag racer eh.

[MESmith]

My 2.2 cruises at below 2000rpm, at 100pkh or more. Acceleration is more than enough. Leaves everybody standing at traffic lights, excellent on hills, overtakes nearly everyone. Not interested in charts. Wouldn't swap it for anything costing the same.

[transam]

My 2.2 cruises at below 2000rpm, at 100pkh or more. Acceleration is more than enough. Leaves everybody standing at traffic lights, excellent on hills, overtakes nearly everyone. Not interested in charts. Wouldn't swap it for anything costing the same.

Look forward to meeting you at the stop light drags. ..........

[Ace of Pop]

At least when Fords stop they don't do the Toyota 3 Step Dance. Nose down ,Recoil back, boing forward n Stop.!! . Or is it that Fords are very slow.Whack the brakes on in a PJS and it stops perfect.

[Jitar]

We were until your post #6

The topic is about a 2.2. Yes/No. It is a slug Yes/No.

Advertised low HP. 2.2 @3700 rpm

much higher HP 3.2 @ 3000rpm

The 2.2 is a slug. Who on earth revs stuff to that rpm on a work horse when better stuff out there.?

Yes the Ford 2.2L.

No it is not a slug.

Max power at 3,700 rpm is fine for a diesel pickup.

E.G. The current 2.5 and 3.0L Hilux engines max power is at similar revs (3,600 rpm).

The torque peak on the Ford 2.2L begins at 1,500 rpm (lower than for the 3.2L) so it is not particularly peaky or high reving.

Edited May 15, 2013 by Jitar

[transam]

We were until your post #6

The topic is about a 2.2. Yes/No. It is a slug Yes/No.

Advertised low HP. 2.2 @3700 rpm

much higher HP 3.2 @ 3000rpm

The 2.2 is a slug. Who on earth revs stuff to that rpm on a work horse when better stuff out there.?

Yes the Ford 2.2L.

No it is not a slug.

Max power at 3,700 rpm is fine for a diesel pickup.

E.G. The current 2.5 and 3.0L Hilux engines max power is at similar revs (3,600 rpm).

The torque peak on the Ford 2.2L begins at 1,500 rpm (lower than for the 3.2L) so it is not particularly peaky or high reving.

You are not quoting what ''FIGURE'' happens at a particular rpm between the rides you quote. The 2.2 is a slug at the rpm to do normal truck stuff

Edited May 15, 2013 by transam

[Jitar]

Not sure what you mean so here are the figures from the Hilux brochure for the AT:

Toyota 3.0L = 171hp @3,600 rpm 360Nm @ 1,400 - 3200rpm

Toyota 2.5L = 120 @3,400 or 144hp @3,600 rpm 343Nm @ 1,400 - 3,200rpm

Ford 2.2L = 150hp @3,700 rpm and 375Nm @ 1,500 - 2,500rpm

The Ford figures look competitive and certainly not slug like.

These peak values are only part of the story, MRO's graphs are better but the result is the same.

Edited May 15, 2013 by Jitar

[puuchai299]

My 2.2 cruises at below 2000rpm, at 100pkh or more. Acceleration is more than enough. Leaves everybody standing at traffic lights, excellent on hills, overtakes nearly everyone. Not interested in charts. Wouldn't swap it for anything costing the same.

Couldn't agree more.

[phutoie2]

My 2.2 cruises at below 2000rpm, at 100pkh or more.  Acceleration is more than enough.  Leaves everybody standing at traffic lights, excellent on hills, overtakes nearly everyone.  Not interested in charts.  Wouldn't swap it for anything costing the same.  

Couldn't agree more.

Nice boast but I've not met a Dagenham dustbin yet that can get past my 3L auto Vigo at the lights.

Sent from my i-mobile IQ 2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[MESmith]

My 2.2 cruises at below 2000rpm, at 100pkh or more. Acceleration is more than enough. Leaves everybody standing at traffic lights, excellent on hills, overtakes nearly everyone. Not interested in charts. Wouldn't swap it for anything costing the same.

Look forward to meeting you at the stop light drags. ..........

Why don't you take one for a test drive? What are you afraid of?

Edited May 15, 2013 by MESmith

[MESmith]

My 2.2 cruises at below 2000rpm, at 100pkh or more. Acceleration is more than enough. Leaves everybody standing at traffic lights, excellent on hills, overtakes nearly everyone. Not interested in charts. Wouldn't swap it for anything costing the same.

Couldn't agree more.

Nice boast but I've not met a Dagenham dustbin yet that can get past my 3L auto Vigo at the lights.

Sent from my i-mobile IQ 2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Road hog

[puuchai299]

My 2.2 cruises at below 2000rpm, at 100pkh or more. Acceleration is more than enough. Leaves everybody standing at traffic lights, excellent on hills, overtakes nearly everyone. Not interested in charts. Wouldn't swap it for anything costing the same.

Couldn't agree more.

Nice boast but I've not met a Dagenham dustbin yet that can get past my 3L auto Vigo at the lights.

Sent from my i-mobile IQ 2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Hehe,that's just what a Vigo sounds like when you close the doors on em, a Dustbin...

[IMHO]

LOL at you guys

The Ford 2.2L is actually quite impressive when compared against most other 2.5L engines in the segment (bar the Mitsu 2.5L VGS), but it's pushing several hundred kilos more than most of it's competitors, so doesn't feel as eager off the line as a more torquey >2.5L lump or a much lighter aged design - once underway it 'punches above it's weight' though, IMHO.

Edited May 15, 2013 by IMHO

[moganman]

Hahahaha, you gotta luv it..........a bunch of people having a go about who drives the faster truck!!!

It's a truck.........and a stock truck at that..........who gives a sh!t about how fast it comes off the line.

If you're looking to debate performance, go out and get yourself a 1970 Hemi Challenger or something.....

[stevenl]

My 2.2 cruises at below 2000rpm, at 100pkh or more. Acceleration is more than enough. Leaves everybody standing at traffic lights, excellent on hills, overtakes nearly everyone. Not interested in charts. Wouldn't swap it for anything costing the same.

Look forward to meeting you at the stop light drags. ..........

Why don't you take one for a test drive? What are you afraid of?

He is afraid he can't slag of anything that is not Toyota anymore once he has driven something else.

[transam]

My 2.2 cruises at below 2000rpm, at 100pkh or more. Acceleration is more than enough. Leaves everybody standing at traffic lights, excellent on hills, overtakes nearly everyone. Not interested in charts. Wouldn't swap it for anything costing the same.

Look forward to meeting you at the stop light drags. ..........

Why don't you take one for a test drive? What are you afraid of?

He is afraid he can't slag of anything that is not Toyota anymore once he has driven something else.

How right you are , thanks for your ''once again'' very informative post. ..........

[transam]

Hahahaha, you gotta luv it..........a bunch of people having a go about who drives the faster truck!!!

It's a truck.........and a stock truck at that..........who gives a sh!t about how fast it comes off the line.

If you're looking to debate performance, go out and get yourself a 1970 Hemi Challenger or something.....

Think the point l was trying to make is that there is a vast difference (on paper) between the 2.2 and 3.2 engines.

[Ace of Pop]

Stop all this bickering, get a real Truck.The Isuzu N Series.5.2L. You can have the 215 H.P. Motor,if you wana race.

[stevenl]

Hahahaha, you gotta luv it..........a bunch of people having a go about who drives the faster truck!!!

It's a truck.........and a stock truck at that..........who gives a sh!t about how fast it comes off the line.

If you're looking to debate performance, go out and get yourself a 1970 Hemi Challenger or something.....

Think the point l was trying to make is that there is a vast difference (on paper) between the 2.2 and 3.2 engines.

But on paper hardly any difference between the Ford 2.2 and the Toyota 3.0