2000 Ford Ranger Road Test - Consumer Guide Automotive

Our road test for the 2000 Ford Ranger includes a full evaluation of the 2000 Ford Ranger from the inside out. We evaluate not only engine and handling performance for the 2000 Ford Ranger, but also interior cabin and cargo space. Let our comprehensive road test ratings for the 2000 Ford Ranger help you decide if a 2000 Ford Ranger is right for you.

2000 Ford Ranger Road Test

Pros	Cons

Acceleration (4.0-liter V6)	Rear-seat comfort

Build quality	Acceleration (4-cylinder)

4-door extended-cab	Interior room (regular cab)

	Ride

	Rear-seat entry/exit (extended cab)

Consumer Guide® Road Test Ratings

Acceleration

reg. cab 2WD, 4 cyl man.	ext. cab 4WD, 4.0 V6 auto.	Class Average
3	5	4

Unladen 4-cylinder Rangers and B-Series Mazdas perform adequately, but the 4.0-liter V6 is the most-sensible choice in a vehicle of this sort and doesn't cost much more than the 3.0.

Fuel Economy

reg. cab 2WD, 4 cyl man.	ext. cab 4WD, 4.0 V6 auto.	Class Average
5	5	4.6

Over 7371 miles, our extended-use-test 4.0/automatic SuperCab 4x4 averaged 15.9 mpg. The 4-cylinder is gruffer but thriftier than the sixes, our Mazda averaging 20.1 mpg.

Ride Quality

reg. cab 2WD, 4 cyl man.	ext. cab 4WD, 4.0 V6 auto.	Class Average
2	4	3.3

Regardless of engine or brand name, these little haulers have admirable ride qualities. They jiggle more on rough roads than most cars, but absorb big bumps well.

Steering/Handling/Braking

reg. cab 2WD, 4 cyl man.	ext. cab 4WD, 4.0 V6 auto.	Class Average
3	3	3.3

Stable in corners with moderate body lean, nicely weighted steering, and good directional stability.

Quietness

reg. cab 2WD, 4 cyl man.	ext. cab 4WD, 4.0 V6 auto.	Class Average
3	4	3.4

Not quite as carlike as the Dakota, but better isolation from engine, wind, and road noise than most compact pickups.

Controls

reg. cab 2WD, 4 cyl man.	ext. cab 4WD, 4.0 V6 auto.	Class Average
7	7	5.9

Ranger and B-Series offer a convenient carlike dashboard, solid overall assembly, and better-quality interior materials than most rivals.

Room/Comfort/Driver Seating (front)

reg. cab 2WD, 4 cyl man.	ext. cab 4WD, 4.0 V6 auto.	Class Average
3	4	3.8

Good head and leg room, but three adults are a tight squeeze, and entry/exit borders on awkward in the higher-riding 4x4s.

Room/Comfort (rear)

reg. cab 2WD, 4 cyl man.	ext. cab 4WD, 4.0 V6 auto.	Class Average
0	1	.9

Two doors or four, the extended-cab's child-size rear-seat area is better used for cargo. However, unlike the GM versions, Ford and Mazda retain two rear jump seats even with the rear doors.

Cargo Room

reg. cab 2WD, 4 cyl man.	ext. cab 4WD, 4.0 V6 auto.	Class Average
1	3	2.3

Better-than-average behind-seat regular-cab space. Extended cabs carry lots of stuff. Dual rear doors are nice, but don't open independently of the fronts, making loading difficult in confined spaces.

Value within Class

reg. cab 2WD, 4 cyl man.	ext. cab 4WD, 4.0 V6 auto.	Class Average
5	7	4.6

Dodge's larger Dakota offers brawny V8s and full-time 4WD, but these Ford-built trucks have plenty of assets and are without glaring faults. Ranger is justifiably a best-seller, but the functionally interchangeable but less-popular B-Series is likely to carry deeper discounts.

Total Score