Ford's 2019 Ranger will have same combined MPG as Chevy's diesel truck.
John Goreham's picture

2019 Ford Ranger Will Have Same Combined MPG Rating As Chevy's Colorado Duramax Diesel

Ford has announced that its new 2019 Ranger will have the same MPG Combined ratings as the diesel Colorado and Canyon.
Advertisement

The all-new Ford Ranger will have the same Combined MPG ratings as the Chevy Colorado and GMC Canyon equipped with the Duramax diesel engines. Rear-wheel drive Rangers will have a Combined MPG rating of 23 and 4X4 Rangers will have a 22 MPG Combined EPA estimate according to Ford. This means that Ford's Ranger will have a lower cost for fuel, since the cost of diesel is higher than that of regular unleaded.

colorado doesel mpg

“Midsize truck customers have been asking for a pickup that’s Built Ford Tough,” said Todd Eckert, Ford truck group marketing manager. “And Ranger will deliver with durability, capability and fuel efficiency, while also providing in-city maneuverability and the freedom desired by many midsize pickup truck buyers to go off the grid.”

The new Ranger offers 310 lb-ft of torque. It will also have a very low RPM for its torque plateau. Such an engine is ideally-suited to towing. The Ranger will also have 270 hp, far more than any other diesel or gasoline 4-cylinder engine in this class. The combination of high torque at low RPMs and high HP at high RPMs will enable the Ranger to be both great for towing and also quick.

diesel vs gasoline

As of today's publication of this story, the AAA national average price for diesel is 22% higher than the cost of regular unleaded. The Ranger will save a driver thousands in fuel costs compared to a diesel truck.

Torque News will provide additional information on this topic once FuelEconomy.Gov adds the Ranger's data to its page. We have also requested a torque and hp curve from Ford.


Subscribe to Torque News on YouTube.


Follow Torque News on YouTube, Twitter and Facebook.

Comments

Not towing that supra it won't.
That’s if you never hit boost. Common misconception with small gas turbos. Real world economy is always worse. They get great gas mileage as long as you feather the throttle.
The small engine will be working really hard in the real world. Guarantee you won't hit anywhere close to that actually driving it.
Wyatt it depends on how the power curve and air flows are. For this engine I highly doubt it won’t see boost more often than not. Look at the f150 eco boost for reference. EPA is great. Real world is not so great. EPA is rated at 22 combined, real world is more around 19-20. Pretty stark difference. But it depends on the engine and how the power band sits. This engine doesn’t have low maximum torque capabilities which would allow it to tip out of boost, so I bet it’s not gonna be much different.
In many markets diesel fuel is anywhere between .75-$1.00 more than regular unleaded gasoline. The factor in the additional cost of DEF fluid that nearly no one gets the same lifespan out of a tank of DEF in any modern diesel so that will add up to the annual costs to be fair. Factor in the addtional $4,000 in cost to get the Diesel engine, the added cost of the fuel, the def, both are turbo so keep your foot in the boost and the marginal increase in mpg will take upwards of 11 years (15k Miles per year avg driven) of use to break even by comparing the upcharge of the diesel vs say a gas version. I.e. diesel is a marketing gimmick
The Fast Lane Truck has been testing the new Ford Ranger and disapointed with the advertised MPG on the highway. Ford is also investigating why it’s labeled as 24 MPG highway. To make things worse, it only comes with an 18 gallon fuel tank. No good for it’s max advertised tow rating.
Those folks at TFT Trucks are among the best in the business. It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out.
It has got to have hyper mile.
Seems like they only built this to compete with the Tacoma. The vast majority will be driving this to work and not climbing boulders every weekend. An auto 4WD setting should be included. I drive in the snow and ice, not mountains.
“The all-new Ford Ranger will have the same Combined MPG ratings as the Chevy Colorado and GMC Canyon equipped with the Duramax diesel engines.“ No, it won’t. Does anyone at this website fact check anything? The 2 wheel drive Chevy Colorado and GMC Canyon with the Duramax 2.8L Diesel engine gets 22 mpg city, 30 mpg highway, and a combined 25 mpg. Looked it up in two minutes on the EPA website:
Hi Todd, Thanks for your comment. We certainly are not perfect, but in this instance, we think that we have the facts straight. We have added a screenshot of the Colorado Duramax' MPG ratings to the story. If we are still mistaken please clarify so that we can help improve the story. Thanks again.
I know this is an old article but what you are posting is far from facts they are claims. I am a gear head with an Engineering background. The fact is the diesel cycle is more efficient than the otto cycle. On top of that diesel fuel has way more energy than gasoline. Burn gas and you have a blue flame with orange tips but when you burn diesel it has an intense white flame that will light up a room way more than gasoline. If you do a deep dive you will find that diesels are usually underrated and gasoline engines overrated. Most of that stemmed from the lawsuit of Volkswagen's claim on their TDI. The Ranger was on my short list and is decent but I did go for the Diesel Canyon and I am very happy I did. When my truck was brand new I saw 7.1L/100 km on the Hwy. I have since added a CAI and catback exhaust and that dropped me into the 6.1L/100 range and have gotten into the low 5L to mid 5L/100 range with a tail winds. It blows my mind that a truck can get that kind of milage! I just looked at my fuel consumption and with 450 km and a shade over 1/4 tank burnt I am averaging 8.4L/100 and that is with 60/40 city/hwy. Diesel's like to lug and I am usually running at 1300rpm with the converter locked up in town. FL trucks got 10 mpg more in the Diesel on the same stretch than the Ranger. You just can't compare a diesel to gasoline.
No need for a deep dive to research fuel efficiency. I've tested many diesel vehicles and also many gas vehicles and they all return fuel efficiency numbers nearly identical to the EPA estimates or slightly better. The hybrids and plug-ins also have very accurate data from the EPA. I'm glad you are happy with your modified diesel truck. I was very surprised to see MPG ratings near 40 for the new base Maverick when I tested it this month. If you get such great mileage with your modified Canyon, I'm sure you would also beat the Ranger's ratings if you made similar mods and drive in a similar fashion. Thanks for adding a comment.
The Ford 4 banger turbo will also be working a lot harder when towing, and have less range than the Chevy 4 banger diesel turbo. I drive a Colorado diesel about 42 miles a day, averaging 26 mpg with some mixed heavy interstate traffic. With no traffic I get 29/30 mpg. When towing a 3000 pound trailer at 70mph I get 18.9 mpg. I think Ford is going the right direction with the smaller engine/pickup that is not a dumb waste of money as a daily driver, and still have the capability to play on the weekends, or manuver on crowded city streets. However, they could do even better by making a GOOD diesel that increases mileage to that of the Colorado/Canyon.
I have a 2016 Colorado diesel. I get 25 in town and 30 hwy. I have 369 fb lbs of torque which is 20% more towing torque that the ranger. This article is fake news.
Your truck also has 181 hp. Check the specs.