Ford introduces Ranger Montana trim for South Africa
While North America's Ford Ranger predates the Mesozoic era, the Blue Oval continues to update its small pickup entries around the world. In this case, the automaker has unveiled the limited-edition 'Montana,' available the standard range of 4x2 and 4x4 drivelines, and Double and Super Cab configurations.
While the resulting product remains far from cutting edge, it is nice to see Ford investing in the Ranger nameplate, if only abroad. In South African trim, the Montana is motivated by a 2.5-liter 12-valve oil-burner, with a standard-fit differential lock.
Primarily, the new model is an exercise in 'trim and tape,' with a healthy portion of stainless steel addenda (brush guard, step rails, etc.); along with a bespoke tonneau cover and 15" alloy wheels the obligatory set of decals.
Inside, the Montana receives black leather chairs with contrasting red stitching, and high levels of equipment, including a/c, power windows/locks/mirrors and a compact disc player.
Click through to the Wheels24 feature for more shots of the interior and exterior.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Gale 8:14PM (5/16/2006)
A Ranger by any other name still blows. How that horrible excuse for a truck has lingered in the Ford lineup for so many years is a testamony to just how out of touch with customers Ford is.
Reply
Tad 8:27PM (5/16/2006)
Yet it still outsells any other midsize truck on the market? Hmmm, I think you got it wrong Gale. As a Previous Rnager owner I can testify to the beating the little trucks can take, and the 4.0 is an absolute great motor!
Reply
felonious monk 8:30PM (5/16/2006)
I've got nothing against the Rangers. A friend has one and it has never given him any problems for 40k+ miles since new. I just think it's ironic that South Africa gets a "Montana" Ranger while America gets... zilch.
Time and time again domestic marques neglect the home market but wonder why they are doing so poorly at home. Eh... you think there is a connection? Maybe? just maybe there is?
DUH.
Reply
Tim UF 8:31PM (5/16/2006)
well, is it just me, or is this SoAfrican version of the ranger better looking than the US version...
dump the crap powerdome hood please... if i were looking at pickups i dont need an empty cavern under the hood, id rather have a real compact pickup; none of this midsize versus full (ginormous) size, thank you.. too bad the closest thing to that is the Subie Baja.
how long at 3+ a gallon will it take for big truck (mid and fullsize) sales to lag enough to get the automakers to bring back the real compact truck?
Reply
Shaun Vanover 9:42PM (5/16/2006)
To: Gale....I own a 96 Ranger that has about a 194,500 mi on it and it still gets better gas mileage than either of my friends Dodges and Chevys in its class and it too has a 4.0. By the way, I took it at the track for fun and was able to get a 15.3 in the quarter mile.....gas mileage and still hauls butt....how about that! The only thing Ford has to do to keep the 4.0 still alive is to add two more valves to the current 4.0 and then it will produce even better gas mileage and performance!
Reply
Ryan 9:53PM (5/16/2006)
I have two (2) friends that have Ford Rangers. One is a 91' and the other a 93'. I have to say, is it possible to kill these trucks?! I really dont think so!!! Both of them just keep running and running.
Reply
whofan 10:08PM (5/16/2006)
On some of the truck sites I visit people say the Ranger has the duribility of the older Toyota Tacoma 4 cylinder.
Why should Ford change a good truck? The Ranger looks as fresh as it did 15 years ago.
Too many good vehicles got the axe too soon in years past.
Reply
Gale 10:22PM (5/16/2006)
Everyone I've know who has bought a Ranger has hated it to the point of threatening lawsuits. You can nurse any POS to high mileage if you're gullable enough. Why else would you even buy a Ford? LOL
Reply
tony 10:34PM (5/16/2006)
here is just one of the few evidence why FORD is slowly but surely killing its market share in the US. While it tries to update its modle line internationally we get the updates of gas-guzzlers ... im in San Diego and im paying $3.5 per gallon .. why would i want another gas guzzler? Gale is 100% correct when he said FORD is really out of touch of its customers needs.
Reply
Randy 10:37PM (5/16/2006)
I have to agree with Gale. My '92 Ranger lost its transmission before it hit 60K. All I pulled with it was a single Sea Doo and trailer. I got the trans fixed under warranty only to have the head gasket blow at 72,000. The Ford dealer tried to tell me the head was shot. I finally got that fixed and proceeded to have electrical problems until I sold it for peanuts at 90K. Worst vehicle I've ever owned. I'll never buy domestic again. I have a Nissan Frontier now with 80,000 on it and it's never been in the shop once.
Reply
mike 10:47PM (5/16/2006)
Face it guys .. as good as the Ranger might be we all agree that it needs updating. Its the smallest of the bunch. It lost its best selling small truck status because the Tacoma has gotten better in all aspects while Ranger gets facelifts. Face it FORD has forgotten its domestic market. FORD lovers be prepared when one day it will announce its market share is smaller than Hyundai.
Reply
Rick 10:47PM (5/16/2006)
Why do you guys even cover this garbage? A new bumper on a 93 Ranger on the other side of the planet - wow, great scoop autoblog. Can't wait for the next post about the new 1.8L 4-cyl in the Chery Shinshue.
Reply
dave 10:56PM (5/16/2006)
This is coming from a Ford hater...the Ranger is actually a reliable truck. Electrical and petty problems may sneak up on you, but nothing serious like evident in the rest of the Fords dark history.
Reply
shiznannigan 11:20PM (5/16/2006)
Tony (#9), Except for maybe GM (!), is any automaker really improving the mileage of their trucks and SUVs? Toyota sure isn't. Nissan? nope. Honda doesn't have anything larger than the Pilot/Ridgeline, which only get average mileage for what they are. Chrysler? you must be joking.
So exactly how is ford more "out of touch with it's customers' needs" than any other automaker?
Reply
david 11:45PM (5/16/2006)
nissan. gee, that's the automaker that when they first came to america called themselves datsun. they were so ashamed of their cars they would'nt put their real name on it. buy a blue car, get a green interior, buy a green car, get a red interior, bring a wide assortment of metric tool on any trip over a mile, cause your sure gonna need em. do i sound anti japanese? after a horrible experience with a tundra, and a nightmare with nissan maxima, i woke up. back to ford and gm. my son has a 98 ranger with 91k, his only problem was a u-joint. his previous was a 95 frontier, shifting problems, rusted out box, everything in the dash rattled after the first 2k, two fuel pumps, and a water pump. sold it to his best of which no longer speaks to him. if a ranger was a bit bigger, i'd buy one in a hertbeat. settled for a f150. sorry i strayed ford and gm, it won't happen again.
Reply
David 12:24AM (5/17/2006)
I bet this truck is available there with a diesel engine. I know people who are driving 20+ year old Ranger pickups with diesel engines hoping someone will offer one again. I have 3 small diesel pickups and would jump at the chance to purchase a new one.
Reply
Tony 7:43AM (5/17/2006)
The problem I have with a Ranger, (I used to own a 97 Ranger supercab 4.0) Loved the truck. But I wouldn't buy one today, the reason... it looks almost the same as my old 1997 ranger, I am not going to spend that kind of money on a new truck without getting some updated styling, performancea and the bells and whistles. The compitition keeps updating, restyling their trucks. Ford has gone the cheap route of putting no money in the Ranger program so they can make more profit. Alot like the Taurus, no R&D work just pump the same old car out so they are making more money on them.
The problem with that is.... People are not buying Ford's or other American cars. they look Blah, they are expensive compaired to the compitition. I have been a Ford owner for years, my family has always bought Fords. The last few years, They have bought a Mini, Honda Minivan, Nissan and VW.. You get more quality, and features from the imports not to mention resale value. Ford doesn't have anything out there worth buying... what they do have isn't even built in the states anymore... they are built in Canda, Mexico so I might as well buy a Honda, BMW built in the US
Reply
Mark D. 8:49AM (5/17/2006)
I have to weigh in on the bad experience side of this discussion. Nobody's mentioned the transmission. I replaced two of them before 100K, in addition to many other plastic bits falling off. #14 - you're complaining about Nissans rattling? Have you ever owned a Ranger? Obviously not or you'd be deaf from all the cabin noise. When my third transmission went at 118K I unscrewed the license tag outside Morganton, NC and walked away from it. I'll bet whoever ended up with that truck for free will tell you it wasn't worth it. Don't let the Ranger "fan club" here fool anybody - this is a terrible excuse for a truck.
Reply
dave 9:03AM (5/17/2006)
I laugh at some of these truck discussions. Which trucks are the special operations personel i.e. Delta, Seals, Green Berets, and Rangers using in Afghanistan and Iraq???...TOYOTAS AND NISSANS!!! Please know what you are talking about before you knock these companies. If you had a bad experience with a truck then fine but don't knock PPROVEN manufacturers. BTW, the Honda Ridgeline was rated the bet truck 05-06. I'm a fan of Dodge trucks so don't be calling me a domestic hater.
Reply
tp 9:05AM (5/17/2006)
Well, it appears that Gale is nothing more than a Ford hater with an agenda. She is unable to say anything other than everyone she knows that has bought one hates it. How many people do you know that have bought a Ranger? One? My '94 Ranger was the best damn vehicle I have ever owned. 11 years and 120,000 miles later - without a lick of trouble - I decided to upgrade to a more "passenger friendly" F-150. Though the F-150 is awesome - no problems, great usability, all-in-all a wonderful truck - it just is not my Ranger.
Reply