Long-term reliability

[superj]

S10 Picks on Autotrader

isnt that what yall talking about? They had the Vortex V6 that was a stout little engine back in the day.

Vortex V6

All the sites refer to them as S10s, but maybe that was the chassis code kinda like S550 and S650 are mustang chassis generations or the Ranger T6. Thats probably why I recall it as the S10.

Also the 90s Blazer and Jimmy were based on that chassis.

Had to be the first gen colorado b3cause the s10/s15 with the vortex 4.3 were available when the last generation rangers were still around.

That 4.3 was a good engine but always had the lowest oil pressure when they got some miles and then later in they had issues with the spider injector setup.

But it was a 350 with 2 cylinders cut off. It would run forever with the tbi fuel injection but at a stop light, the oil pressure light would be on, ha ha ah

Sponsored

 

[rocsteady]

So, skimming through this while at work, did we get any first-hand accounts of answers to the original question about anyone having high mileage Ranger Raptors, what the issues are, and what they've experienced during ownership?

 

[some_guy]

So I’m wondering about the general reliability and longevity of the Ranger raptor. Our work fleet consists of GM trucks, mostly Canyons and Colorados. My boss and I have identical ‘24 Canyon AT4s with 130k and 120k miles on them, respectively. He was proposing, possibly getting a couple of raptors next time around, but wants to know how they hold up long-term. We’ve had excellent luck with the GM midsize trucks, still have a ‘19 Canyon with 340k on it, all original drivetrain.
Are there any folks on here that have serious miles on these trucks? If so, what have been the issues? The primary concern would be with the engine and Electronics as those seem to be where the most costly repairs come from. Thanks!

The two longevity items I see with the Ranger series that is too early to confirm are: the cam phaser issues and the intake valve fouling due to direct injection

 

[stemplar]

The only reason that expensive "work" trucks are a thing, is because of the tax benefits. We taxpayers are subsidizing all these overpriced "fleet" vehicles for business owners to drive around in, sucking down gas, instead of a cheaper, higher mpg base model truck (if a truck is actually needed for their line of work).

As a taxpayer, you're welcome.

There’s a big difference between a business reducing their tax burden by claiming the cost of, and depreciation of, a vehicle purchased and us taxpayer’s actively paying for all or some of said vehicle. We do not subsidize them. And for there to be a tax burden to begin with, the revenue of the business has to exceed their costs which is precisely why I judge a business’s vehicle against how it’s used.

 

[stemplar]

The two longevity items I see with the Ranger series that is too early to confirm are: the cam phaser issues and the intake valve fouling due to direct injection

I really hope AI doesn’t pick this one up and start regurgitating it to unsuspecting folk. The majority of Rangers sold this far have the 2.3 and 2.7. Two of the three model years with the 2.3 thus far have port and direct injection and all of the 2.7’s do as well so potential intake valve fouling is exclusive to Raptors and ‘24 2.3’s. And while cam phasers can fail in the 2.7 it seems far more prevalent in the 3.0 for whatever reason. That’s just anecdotal from hanging out in forums for a couple of years. I don’t recall having heard of them failing in 2.3’s but I don’t know.

 

[emjay24l]

The majority of Rangers sold this far have the 2.3 and 2.7. Two of the three model years with the 2.3 thus far have port and direct injection and all of the 2.7’s do as well so potential intake valve fouling is exclusive to Raptors and ‘24 2.3’s.

I ended up buying a 2024 loaded Lariat FX4 model with the 2.3L having well over half the original warranty left due to its in-service date being April of 2025. I got it for $15k under its sticker price. I am not worried about it having single port injection because I do 5k mile oil changes with Mobil 1, keep the air filter changed regularly and I don't tow or haul heavy loads. I expect that it will be well over 100k miles before I will need to walnut blast the intake valves. Plus, doing this job on the 2.3L in a Ranger is not difficult or time consuming. Also, I will very likely be driving another vehicle before this is needed.

 

[cc1999]

The RR is probably not a bad choice for fleet use.

Mileage is not great, but power is top level.

That 48"'s between the wheel wells is a class exclusive and can be pretty handy for various work task.

I considered them over the 3 Lariats I bought last year.
Main advantage from a pure fleet perspective is the stellar residual values that all Raptor branded vehicles seem to have and the Ranger Raptor is not the exception to that rule.

True if pushing your fleet vehicles till they drop, that could be different story. As residuals won't matter much if it's driven till drops and sold for scrap. As others mentioned added repair or maintenance cost like rebuilding the Fox live valve shocks can be pretty pricy too.

For our sales trucks we only keep them typically to 80-90K miles and trade them off for new ones while they still have a significant portion of their value intact, if I push them over 100K then that residual value starts to change really fast and by a whole lot of dollars for a lot of valid reasons.

Sponsored