Less engine means more ute
There’s no replacement for displacement, right? New Zealand’s most popular vehicle respectfully disagrees. Damien O’Carroll reports.
The 3.2-litre five-cylinder diesel engine in the Ford Ranger is known internally as the Puma, while the new 2.0-litre bi-turbo four that is available in the Wildtrak is known as the Panther.
While in the natural world, these big cats are the same thing – puma and panther are both just other names for the cougar or mountain lion (and let’s not start on the black panther, which is a generic name for black jaguars or leopards . . . ) – in the ute world they are quite different indeed.
Let me guess – the 2.0-litre is useless compared to the big five, right? After all, only milk and orange juice come in 2.0-litres . . .
Completely wrong – you can get water and fizzy drinks as well.
But also wrong about the 2.0-litre bi-turbo four being useless too. Wildly wrong, in fact, because it is the engine the Ranger was screaming out for, only we didn’t realise it.
Sure, the 3.2 is a great engine: big, brawny and massively torquey, it punches the Ranger along with a confident truck-like authority and even sounds nicely trucky to boot.
But the bi-turbo not only packs more power and torque (157kW and 500Nm versus 147kW and 470Nm from the 3.2), it is also a slick, modern and super-smooth engine that transforms the Ranger into something that actually threatens to out-civilise the Volkswagen Amarok in terms of car-like smoothness and livability.
But that modern smoothness is not all due to just the engine; the 10-speed automatic transmission that comes as a package with it plays an even bigger part in the superb civility of the bi-turbo Wildtrak by being almost imperceptible in its high-speed operation and nicely swift and decisive around town.
Oh, yeah, and quick. This thing is deceptively quick on the open road.
How exactly is something ‘‘deceptively quick’’?
With refinement comes deception – a Ranger with the 3.2 muscles off the line with the typical lag of a turbo diesel, followed by a big punch when the torque lands, while nailing the throttle when moving results in something similar, but more forceful as the six-speed auto drops emphatically down a cog or two to get things moving.
The bi-turbo does none of this. Instead it moves off the line with more urgency and noticeably less lag than the 3.2. There is also less aural drama, but it is impressively and effortlessly smooth. But it is when it is up in the revs and making the most of the brilliant transmission’s abilities that it all becomes even more deeply impressive.
Nailing the throttle on the move has none of the noise or shift-shock of the 3.2, instead it is just a slick and instant increase in speed. The transmission slips quickly and quietly down however many gears it needs to (and even has the ability to skip a gear altogether for added smoothness) and is remarkably good at keeping the engine right in the meat of its torque band.
Throw in the suspension tweaks Ford made at the most recent facelift
and you have a large ladder chassis vehicle that can belt along a back road at deceptively high speeds – enough to get you in legal trouble if you aren’t paying close attention.
OK, but it’s still a truck. How good can it be?
As capable, smooth and comfortable as the bi-turbo Wildtrak is, it is still a truck, which does mean certain compromises in ride quality that come as an expected part of the ute package.
And while these expected compromises aren’t as glaring in the Ranger as some other utes, the extreme civility of the bi-turbo drivetrain does make you wish for a little more love and understanding from the rear suspension, particularly in comparison with the other vehicle that currently runs the bi-turbo and 10-speeder – the Ranger Raptor.
But the Raptor, with its plush ride and fantastic handling coming at the expense of ultimate towing and load carrying ability, is a glaring exception to the ute rule – and one that you pay a lot more for – while the Wildtrak, despite its extra shiny bits, is still expected to function as a traditional ute should.
And as far as that goes, it is possibly the best compromise in the segment today.
But what about that traditional ute stuff?
While the bi-turbo boasts more torque and power than the 3.2, the power peaks slightly higher (3750rpm versus 3000rpm for the 3.2), but the torque peaks at exactly the same point for both – 1750rpm.
The 3.2 does have a slightly broader range at that peak, however, with the maximum torque range stretching from the 1750rpm to 2500rpm, while the bi-turbo starts dropping off at just 2000rpm.
However, the 10-speed transmission keeps the bi-turbo perfectly in the fat part of that torque curve in everyday and off-road driving, but while we didn’t have a chance to test its towing abilities Australian tests suggest it is every bit as capable as the 3.2 (both have the same rating), apart from engine braking, where the bigger engine still has an advantage.
And in terms of tray payload the bi-turbo’s lighter overall kerb weight actually gives it a slight advantage, with a 961kg maximum payload compared to the 3.2 Wildtrak’s 929kg.
Other cars to consider?
While there is no shortage of choice in the segment, the only thing that actually compares to the Wildtrak bi-turbo’s impressively smooth and civilised nature is the Volkswagen Amarok.
But the Amarok is getting on now – and is starting to feel it – while the Ranger still feels fresh and significantly more modern with the new engine and transmission. Then there is the fact that the Amarok still lacks rear airbags, an almost unforgivable safety omission these days.
Based on our brief drive of it at the international reveal last year, the forthcoming Mitsubishi Triton could well offer a superior ride – as well as a serious price advantage – but still has its old engine.
And then there is in-house competition in the form of the 3.2-litre Wildtrak that is still very much available and you may well prefer if you regularly tow really big loads or you are desperately clinging to that cliche about orange juice at the start.