Comparison between Global Ford Ranger and a Tundra

[RobertRyan]

Fairly rare to get something like this. The horrendous price of the Tundra, comes mainly from the Conversion process, where the vehicle basically has to be rebuilt to get a RHD driving position
Ford Global Ranger versus a Toyota Tundra

[RobertRyan]

Specifications for Cab Chassis variant

This is the all-round workhorse you can always rely on. You have all the technology and comfort you want upfront, and an exceptional load-space capability in the back.
3.2L TDCi Diesel
6-speed Manual Transmission (with optional 6-speed Automatic Transmission) (at extra cost)
Towing Capacity of 3,500kg1
Payload of up to 1,405kg2 (3100lb)
800mm Water Wading3
3.5" Ice Blue multi-function display
Bluetooth®4 with Voice Control
iPod5 integration
Cruise control
Steering wheel mounted audio / cruise control buttons
Power windows and mirrors
Dynamic Stability Control with ABS
Overhead console
Anti-lock Braking System (ABS) with Electronic Brakeforce Distribution (EBD) and Traction Control
Emergency Brake Assist (EBA)
12V auxiliary power socket
Driver and Front Passenger Airbags
4 way manual driver seat adjuster with lumbar support
Volumetric Alarm

[RobertRyan]

Plumbers Work vehicle with 8ft Tray


Ford Ranger in jungles of Borneo(looks like got bogged in the mud of a dirt road)

[RobertRyan]

rjstractor wrote:
you know those low payload numbers are the norm here for 150/1500 series pickups. For your market the Tundra would probably have similar ratings with a stiffer rear spring pack but the cushy ride might suffer. Ford does make an F150HD with payload ratings up to 3000 pounds depending on configuration

Heavier springs would not address it's poor off road performance, the Tundra is built as a car, with some towing ability. Ranger with some towing ability but considerably more Off Road ability

[RobertRyan]

goducks10 wrote:
Thanks for the vid Robert. Question, are all your parking lots geared toward small vehicles? I had to laugh when the tester pulled into the parking lot like he had a trailer in tow.

No depends on where you park. The other aspect, which came out in the Video was the Tundra's extra size is not that good on small roads or that matter small dirt ones

[RobertRyan]

rjstractor wrote:

RobertRyan wrote:
4) Payloads for a normal DualCab are in the 2300-2500lb range, so the paltry numbers for the Tundra were a shock for a largish vehicle.

As you know those low payload numbers are the norm here for 150/1500 series pickups. For your market the Tundra would probably have similar ratings with a stiffer rear spring pack but the cushy ride might suffer. Ford does make an F150HD with payload ratings up to 3000 pounds depending on configuration.

I really like the global Ranger, but the "tray" as you guys call it is so small as to be almost useless. No different than the trend here in the states, pickups are becoming more passenger oriented vehicles.

Well the single Cab version of the Ranger, does have a slightly over 3000lg rating.. rear tray can become about 8ft using the single cab, or a Utility Tray which can be a lot longer for a Tradesmen's vehicle

[goducks10]

Thanks for the vid Robert. Question, are all your parking lots geared toward small vehicles? I had to laugh when the tester pulled into the parking lot like he had a trailer in tow.

[rjstractor]

RobertRyan wrote:
4) Payloads for a normal DualCab are in the 2300-2500lb range, so the paltry numbers for the Tundra were a shock for a largish vehicle.

As you know those low payload numbers are the norm here for 150/1500 series pickups. For your market the Tundra would probably have similar ratings with a stiffer rear spring pack but the cushy ride might suffer. Ford does make an F150HD with payload ratings up to 3000 pounds depending on configuration.

I really like the global Ranger, but the "tray" as you guys call it is so small as to be almost useless. No different than the trend here in the states, pickups are becoming more passenger oriented vehicles.

[RobertRyan]

Notes on the Video:
(1) the presenter keeps calling both vehicles "cars", because that is what they will be used for 85-90% of the time
(2) Fuel usage of the Tundra is on par with a V8 performance car. The diesel in the Ranger is much more frugal
(3) Notice the towing specifications are lower for both vehicles than you would expect in the US. I.e Tundra 4 tonnes, Ranger 3.5 tonnes, pretty conservative ratings given
(4) Payloads for a normal DualCab are in the 2300-2500lb range, so the paltry numbers for the Tundra were a shock for a largish vehicle.
(5) Most Australian Road tests of 4x4 Utes as they are all so called here, do a lot of Off Road and Track/Trail negotiating. Seeing the Tundra is more a pavement pounder than anything else, I guess it was not considered

[RobertRyan]

My Nephew has a 1972 Mustang that has not been converted. He uses it to go on Classic American Car rallies. Not a huge problem with the Mustang as it is fairly small.
Performax have got approval to meet ADR regulations for new Ford Pickups. They have modified the Diesel engine, so it now can meet Euro V regs. As well they have replaced items that have had problems in the U.S. and retuned the suspension with updated shock absorbers to improve ride and handling on the Lariat models, also they have added the HEMA system to the standard Ford Sync electronics.

[DaveF-250SD]

Thank you, Robert. I was wondering about the law there, as I had a conversation with an Australian couple about a year ago at a restaurant in Los Angeles. The Gentleman and his Wife complimented my 2004 F-250 SD pickup. They come to America every three or four years for sightseeing. This trip, however, was to purchase a classic car. They had narrowed it down to three cars, late 60's and early 70's muscle cars. They planned on inspecting and driving all three, then they would decide which one to purchase and have shipped to Sydney. They already own an American car from the 50's, and another from the early 70's. The man mentioned having two friends (Mates) back home that were interested in the mid 80's Camaros and 5 Liter Mustangs, but they were waiting to see how the law would change as to the age requirement for mandatory conversion, which as you know is quite expensive. They were anticipating that the age requirement would be lowered to twenty or twenty five years. He mentioned the current standard to be thirty years old, and that any vehicle with left hand drive had to have a decal placed on the rear bumper stating that the vehicle is left hand drive to alert other drivers to the fact.

[RobertRyan]

DaveF-250SD wrote:
If the Global Ford Ranger is of similar dimensions to the U.S. version, the Tundra would offer far more interior space, as well as a larger bed, although the payload rating is far lower than the Global Ranger, as per the article. The article also mentions the Ford F-250 and Chevrolet Silverado are available in Australia for a similar price to the Tundra. The Silverado and F-250 have far greater payload capacities than the Tundra, as well as a greater towing capacity, and full-floating rear axles. Both offer a far greater value for the money than the Tundra, but the Ranger trumps them all with a price that is roughly half that of the other offerings. I understand that Australia has revised the requirement for imported vehicles to be converted to right hand drive. It used to apply to vehicles newer than thirty years old. What is the new age limit for not having to convert?

In reality ALL vehicles have to be converted. It is a nightmare to drive a U.S. Pickup from what would be the passengers seat. In England they allow LHD vehicles, thar are new but you cannot insure them in case of an accident.
Only reason I can see getting the Tundra, is being different. None of the U.S. 1/2 tons are used to do any work, they are just different "cars"
The 3/4 and 1 Tons are used to pull Caravans or 5th Wheelers
No the Global Ranger is considerably bigger than the U.S. version, similar to the new Colorado and GMC
Age that can be left as LHD is 25yrs old, but very few do leave then as that

[DaveF-250SD]

If the Global Ford Ranger is of similar dimensions to the U.S. version, the Tundra would offer far more interior space, as well as a larger bed, although the payload rating is far lower than the Global Ranger, as per the article. The article also mentions the Ford F-250 and Chevrolet Silverado are available in Australia for a similar price to the Tundra. The Silverado and F-250 have far greater payload capacities than the Tundra, as well as a greater towing capacity, and full-floating rear axles. Both offer a far greater value for the money than the Tundra, but the Ranger trumps them all with a price that is roughly half that of the other offerings. I understand that Australia has revised the requirement for imported vehicles to be converted to right hand drive. It used to apply to vehicles newer than thirty years old. What is the new age limit for not having to convert?