This is not a fair comparison. The Australian model is a dual-cab 4x4 with a bigger engine, and is better equipped than the base model in the US. The base F-150 we get in Australia is US$60k, or AU$87k once converted. Once you ship it here, add GST and convert it to RHD, you end up with a $110k car, which is what Ford charges.
The Lariat price in the USA once converted to AUD is $96k. Add govt taxes, import charges, shipping and conversion to RHD the price of $139k AUD is not excessive 🤔
absolute ridiculous honestly. Better off just getting the ranger raptor for 88k as prices have dropped on them. Also this big utes are hard to park in AUS carparks, stockland, westfield etc
There’s only two things ranger does better than the F-150; 1) off-road 2) the rear view side mirrors. Surprisingly the rear view mirrors are larger on ranger than the converted F-150.
@@Sabumnim666 Sounds a bit ominous! Maybe that's why Toyota Australia has put a 12-month trial with 300 Tundras going around Australia before it gives the green light.
Not true. It's called a half-ton truck in the US which is the useful payload, and in Australia you can drive up to 4.5 t GVM on a car licence. The F-150 GVM is a paltry 3,265 kg.
@@MichaelCsikosthe f150 can do 1100kg with the power boost. This isn’t the power boost engine but the body and suspension are the same. It’s because of licensing. The Silverado 2500hd is 750kg on a car licence or 1396kg on a truck licence. The f150 would be the same but ford haven’t given the option
There's been more since we recorded the video too. Not a good look for Ford. But at least they're taking the issues seriously and attempting to fix them.
The tiny GVM and paltry payload of the F-150 is a cruel joke. In the real world there's no way you could tow 4,500 kg on a holiday with ~450 kg on the towball. You'd have to leave the wife and kids at home and have practically nothing else in the tray.
Exactly the reason I didn’t buy one needs full GCM upgrade at least 10K add 3K for wiring to suit caravan next step in my opinion RAM 2500 by the time you upgrade a 150 pricing not too far apart
Currently living in Park City Utah, the F150 Platinum 23, Powerboost is the most luxurious car we've ever owned - not cheap, but so comfortable. I understand why they've been no. 1 for 40 years, Built Tough! Every 2nd car/truck here, and snall vs 350-650 on roads. Would love to bring home, but $50+k!!?
I have towed a 2800kg 17’6” full height van with our F150 and the fuel consumption average is 18lt per 100k that’s better than our 2020 HiLux and it doesn’t get pushed around by truck or other caravan. And its backed by Ford 😎
The f150 used to be so massive!!! Now it just looks like a long wheel base ranger. Mid sized utes are so massive now. Got a pic of my 90s courier next to a dodge ram. The size difference is laughable. It’s so tiny next to it. But the next new ranger will probably be the same size as a f150.
Not a "permanent full time 4wd system". Prado, 80,100,200,300 series Cruisers, Pajero and Triton with super select, VW Amarok (the one designed by VW) are full time 4wd. Ranger and F150 lack a centre diff and current models were born in a emission conscious environment. The have a clutch pack on demand system. Functions and feels very different to a true full time 4wd/Awd system. The torque vectoring display show that even in 4A, there isn't drive going to the front wheel on a full time basis. This is a basic operational function that could be determined by actually driving the vehicle. Stop reading the marketing brochures....... I personally own a V6 Ranger. Great vehicle. But not full time 4wd even in 4A.
I wish ford would dial back on the tech and just make it actually work better.. the new models are still having massive issues with the stereo and infotainment which has been going on for years now..
I don't understand the Payload limitations on these US Utes? if we can get a 1000kg payload from a Ranger why not the US Utes. That F150 is not a suitable tow vehicle with its pay load limitations. 350-450 of tow ball weight and a couple pensioners and you are over loaded.
It’s only Aussie spec trucks that are limited, not the ones sold here in the States. The max payload on our F150’s is up to 3315 lbs or 1503 kg. Plus we have F250’s, 350’s and 450’s with payloads over 8,000 lbs without even going up to the commercial trucks.
@@mvcharisma2968 It's puzzling why the payload is so low on Australian models. When we drove it, it felt like it could handle 1500kg, easy. More, even.
You can blame our stupid safety regulations that require so much unnecessary protection which adds more to the total curb weight therefore the truck is carrying extra so the payload goes down. Another factor is that trucks are optimized for towing rather than payload. On top of that we hardly get any diesels which contribute to the payload capacity. The US version of the Ford Ranger has significantly less payload than it’s global counterpart which sucks
Love that Ford Pass. Even on my company car, a 2.0 dual cab with the 10 speed, can take advantage of it. You can remotely start it and have the last known climate setting run. On a cold Toowoomba morning you can have the car running for up to 15m (x2 before key start if you need) and the car is warm and defrosted by the time you go downstairs.
I have had a Ranger for 8 years now. It has been a spectacularly reliable vehicle over very high ks. That many ks has taught me how to drive it well and where it will fit. I concede that while I’m tested regularly and its bum is always hanging out in a car park, the big US utes would be a nightmare here. Therebmust be so many places where you simply couldn’t take one. USA is set up for them, Australia (and many other countries) aren’t. Watch the hogh turnover rates of them, as people get sick of this.
Yes Ford may be an American company, but the Ranger was developed and tuned (chassis) in Australia by Australian engineers. Maybe that was what he was getting at?
@@devilsadvocate2548 Yep, precisely. Pedro is correct, they are both cars from an American brand but the vehicles we get in Australia are tailored for the local market and built in Thailand, not the USA.
The reality is these are still agricultural grade, they are not refined ore comfortable to drive as a Sedan or a wagon. Had the Ranger for 3 years, ok for a busyness Ute but not a family car or weekender for me, I went back to a wagon AWD which is far better for my use. Cheers from Oz 🇦🇺
For those hoping a GVM upgrade will solve the paltry payload problem, the rear axle is rated at only 1,882 kg, so I'm not sure how local engineers will overcome this limitation. Compare this to a 20-year-old F250 which has over 2,800 kg for the rear axle. All the 1500-class American trucks have pathetic rear axle ratings. The RAM 1500 is even worse at only 1770 kg.
Just remember with the ranger, the infotainment systems is buggy as fuk, having to reset it all the time. Car still has a lot of bugs with no fixes in sight
There is a petrol engine in the Ranger Raptor, which is $90K-plus. Its twin, the Volkswagen Amarok, comes with the 2.3-litre turbo-petrol and it's pretty good.
It would have to be F-150 Raptor versus Ranger Raptor. But there is talk the F-150 Raptor will eventually rolls into Aussie Ford dealerships in the future. Stay tuned for news on that.
Regardless of the day, year and off-road and snow driving, I choose the Ford 150 because if you add up the pluses and minuses, the Ford 150 wins big time. Driving characteristics are equally good, but what shines in the deserts is the cabin space and ESPECIALLY the space for passengers in the back seat. The Ford Ranger is useless regarding the rear seats and the little legroom there is. It was clear that you pressed your rear against the backrest of the Ranger to create more legroom and you did not do that at all when you sat in the back seat of the 150. In fact, you moved the rear forward to show how much legroom there was. So I would like you to criticize the Ranger more for the small legroom that is in the back seat of the Ranger, but you chose not to, even though the space is crap compared to the space in the 150. I have also personally compared a Ford 150 with a Ford Ranger and my recommendation is that you buy a 3 year old Ford 150 and you will be much happier with the 150 than a new Ford Ranger with crappy legroom in the back seats. I will never choose a Ford Ranger over a Ford 150. And here in Europe we have many thousands of Ford Rangers because they are sold here. We have very few Ford 150s in Europe because it is mostly in the USA that 150s are sold, but if you have bought a Ford 150, you will never go back to a Ford Ranger with the small crappy cabin. The Ranger is WAY too expensive compared to the small cabin the Ranger has. Way too expensive.
The 2024 Ranger has more rear legroom then 2023 Ranger. I had an F150 and much perfer the Ranger it gets much better fuel economy at higher speeds like 80+mph. I also like the more nimble feeling in the Ranger instead of the land yacht F150. I go places the F150 cannot go due to the size of the Rangers smaller size. I love my Ranger and would not trade it for an F150 anytime soon. Its the best size Raptor for offroading period.
@@kenwolf2431 Bullshit. You are defending the Ranger because you bought one and that is the only reason you are defending the Ranger against the f150. In 2024 there is still too little leg room in the back seat so stop your lies. A typical image in traffic is the Rangers without anyone in the back seat. There is a reason for that. TOO LITTLE LEG ROOM. The F 150 has so many advantages over the Ranger that if people can afford an F 150, they buy an F 150 because it is clearly the better purchase if you have a family. If you are single and always drive alone, buy a Ranger. But if you have a family then don't spend money on a Ranger that is not worth the money because it is useless for having people sitting in the back seat for 200 - 400 + mils. Does not work!!!
@@davidhanna2051 The Ranger was engineered over a lot of countries, Ford Thailand, Ford Brazil, Ford Argentina, Ford Australia, Ford South Africa and Ford USA, so it really is a world product and was tested in severe conditions of all those different markets. Very happy with my Ranger Limited+ (almost same specs as the Lariat in Australia) here in Brazil.
Yes ford is an American owned company but the ranger was not designed in America, designed and engineered in Australia and built in Thailand. (American model is built in America)
The 1500 series trucks as such make no sense since they have no more loading capacity then a same size SUV. Why buy this and not something like Ford Expedition which has 3 rows of seats ? What's the advantage of F-150 over Ford Expedition, if the later can tow & haul as much as F-150 can, but it also has 3 rows of seats ?
They make no sense, yet it is the number 1 selling vehicle?? Seriously? Size of cargo is not always intrinsically linked to weight. Not everyone wants 3 rows of seats..
@@ScottiPewPew no.1 selling vehicle in America, and nowhere else. Do not underestimate the number of childish people over there who want a vehicle that will look like a truck (as they believe that makes them look tough or something), but is actually a car, as the vehicle that cannot carry heavy loads is technically not a truck. And if you upgrade suspension to be able to carry heavy loads, the ride becomes stiff (as it should be in a truck), but then it's not "comfy" any more. Then you get "If I wanted a real truck, I would buy a 2500; all I wanted is a comfy 1500 car that will look like a truck". UK has it well defined, it is considered a work vehicle (a truck) only if it can carry over a metric ton.
@@igorm.7198 sure, without having a dig at anyone, the comfort level of an F-150 makes it an ideal highway or long road trip vehicle. Also, its tow limit makes it ideal for towing trailers, caravans, and heavy rural equipment. The internal cabin space is perfect for full sized adults while doing so. Never a doubt in my mind that it is not a truck, had that same “argument” elsewhere - it is a utility and not a truck. It may not make sense to you, but it makes a lot of sense to others.
