jump to example.com

I definitely use my truck to haul wood, tools, and all sorts of crap. But like most people, I can’t afford to have a second primary vehicle just for getting groceries, traveling for meetings, or heading down to the pub. And speaking of the pub, what you see above is the parking lot for the place that inspired this post last week. Because the spaces are so small and tight, anyone driving a massive vehicle gets to park about three levels down. All the close spaces are “compact car only” — well, compact cars or my truck.

So yeah, besides costing about half that of a full-size truck and saving me serious cash every week on gas, my little truck also lets me park closer to the pub. Win.


4 Responses to Small Truck Advantage #15: Close Pub Parking

  1. Brau says:

    I drove a Ford Courier (AKA:Mazda B2000) pickup for years. It was great on gas and I certainly could not afford a big engined truck.

    As young (poor) struggling musician it was invaluable for filling up with drums, guitars, amps, risers, speakers *and* loading the tools in for my M-F job in construction. On some weekends it became my camping refuge. Not to mention, a pickup is a great way to lose “the boys” when your girlfriend is with you (Sorry dude, only two seats).

    I find it hard to believe Ford is killing off the Ranger. Dumb. Plain dumb. They should be making it more attractive to younger buyers. They could do that by putting a decent 4-banger in it rather than continuing on this dumb “bigger is better” trend they’ve been on for way too long. They’re choking the crap out of their small engines, basically forcing buyers into a thirsty DuraTec V6 to get some decent pep.

    When my Ford Courier head burned out I went looking for a replacement. I sadly ruled out buying a new Ranger when I test drove their breathless 4-banger. It had less get up than my aged Courier. Chevy S10’s were just as bad or worse. I ended up buying the 4 speed PT Cruiser I own now. It’s almost as good a hauler, has decent pep, gets better mileage than a V6, but the upholstered interior makes it too nice to just toss crap in the way a small pickup affords. So I bought a small trailer for those times. The fit and finish doesn’t compare to the imports, I must say, but the price was more than $5000 less.

  2. Paul says:

    I have a Ranger with the 2.5 Lima engine. It’s underpowered but capable. I’ve towed plenty of stuff with it and drive it every day. Its getting tired, I wish there was a descent alternative available from Ford. What I mean is I wish there was a new Ranger, I can’t see myself buying basically the same truck as my 10 year old one, or really one that hasnt changed much since 1984. They need a new small truck, keep the Ranger name or lose it that doesn’t much matter to me.

    Colorado is nice enough but they are too expensive, Dakota is a gas hog, foreign small trucks are priced like an f150. I’d like an F150 over a tacoma, but I don’t want to pay for the gas an f150 would waste on my trips to the office…

  3. MattC says:

    The new Ranger’s base engine is fine for almost all suburban duties (minus heavy towing). I had a 1997 Ranger with the 2.3L Lima engine. I loved that truck despite being completely underpowered (however the Lima engine is practically unkillable and can be boosted to an inch of its life with a turbo with very little loss in reliability.)It was not a smooth engine by any stretch and Ford finally upgraded the base Ranger engine with the 2.3L 16V engine. I currently have a 2001 GMC Sonoma with the 4.3L V6. While the engine/tranny of the GMC has been troublefree, the body integrity and fit and finish is appalling. It is a definitive rattletrap. I sold my Ranger with almost 200K with zero squeaks an no leaks. I would buy a new Ranger in a second.

  4. tsander says:

    The truck is “cute” looking, but we like ours and I have to compete with the wife to drive it. She prefers it to her Malibu.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *