Sport Trac vs any "small" pickup?

While "window shopping" at my favorite used car dealership today, I ran across an '02 Ford Sport Trac that they "seemed" to be discounting heavily.

My sister ONCE owned one of these, and traded it for a Ridgeline. I never heard why, tho suspect that since she trades often she wanted something that holds it's value better than a Ford. It may also have had transmission problems.

I was looking at 2 WD smallish trucks, and this was a low mileage somewhat loaded truck (59K miles, for $10K). Also found 2 4 door Rangers, equipped nearly the same, and a 04 Tacoma 4 cylinder with auto and no power accessories.

Experiences with the various years of the 1st gen. Sport Trac?

I just got rid of mine after umpteen dozen years ownership. Never had an issue. I did need a little more pulling power is the reason I sold it.

Is the 4' bed actually useable? say to carry a sheet of plywood or drywall?

well, don't they have that 2 foot extension thingy in the bed?

I know/heard of one thing about the sport track, every person I know (3 of them) has had the same complaint.

They suck gas like a Keith Black Hemi at WOT.

My co-worker has one, and he can hardly get 200 miles from a tank, mostly all highway too. The 4.0 V6 is really just not enough motor for that truck. The bedsides are all fiberglass, and I don't even think it's all that heavt, but for anything more than a big ranger, the 4.0 is one to stay away from.

His has been dead-nuts dependable, cept for some wheel bearings that crapped out on him at highway speed a little while back. He says he needs four doors to haul his kid, but couldn't afford a crew cab, didn't wanna mess with rear suicides, and didn't really need a full size. However, he still needed a bed for small landscaping projects at his house, hauling his mower, etc etc.

His only complaint really has been the gas mileage, that and I think its one of the ugliest things on the road.

Never owned one, never driven one so I can't comment from that angle. But like all those 'stumpys' it ain't really a true pickup IMHO. I want a pickup bed I can haul sheets of plywood and dirt bikes in.

I don't "expect" to be hauling sheets of plywood in it, but after this posting I went back and looked at the published stats on the S T vs a "regular" Ranger. It weighs a heck of a lot more, tho I suspect the published weight may have included 4WD, and that could explain the mileage figure.

The main use this might see is for hauling largish/bulky items.

The Rangers this same dealership has are about the same year, but higher mileage 4 door supercabs....with the 3 liter and auto 2WD. (Except for the previously mentioned Tacoma. All are at the same price point.)

Get a 1990s toyota pickup, there isn't any modern truck that can compete. Just show me a moder 1/2 ton that gets over 25mpg. The toyota is cheap to own also, although parts aren't cheap. Luckily the parts don't need to be changed often.

integraguy wrote: While "window shopping" at my favorite used car dealership today, I ran across an '02 Ford Sport Trac that they "seemed" to be discounting heavily. My sister ONCE owned one of these, and traded it for a Ridgeline. I never heard why, tho suspect that since she trades often she wanted something that holds it's value better than a Ford. It may also have had transmission problems. I was looking at 2 WD smallish trucks, and this was a low mileage somewhat loaded truck (59K miles, for $10K). Also found 2 4 door Rangers, equipped nearly the same, and a 04 Tacoma 4 cylinder with auto and no power accessories. Experiences with the various years of the 1st gen. Sport Trac?

I've owned my 4x4 sport trac for several years. I swore off fords for awhile after my svt contour (can you blame me?) but I needed a vehicle a few years back and this one found its way to me. I casually mentioned it to a friend and he told me about his truck that he had for sale. So I wasn't looking for one, it just fell into my lap. I never had any problems with it, wife drives it now. I'd say the price you list is a little high, I paid less for my truck that had slightly more miles but mine came with 4 wheel drive.

I've used it for hauling, but I use my turbo brick for hauling also and of course I can get more in the wagon then in the sport trac. The aluminum bed extender is useful sometimes but I took mine off to allow for stuff to hang out the back when I use the bed.

I don't pay any attention to gas mileage, we both work close to home so we don't drive enough to worry about it. Here's mine....

Here is what mine will look like when I'm done, with the exception of the wheels...

You can lift these trucks up with a body lift kit that costs around $300 plus labor, that is what most people do instead of a suspension lift.

My wife had a jeep grand cherokee at the time I purchased it. I felt that was a piece of crap compared to the sport trac.

There are some engine upgrades that will help with the performance, but supposedly using one of those hand-held tuners to coax more performance apparently makes a big enough difference to be noticed.

Website support seems pretty good, lots of helpful people on this forum(look me up, plance1 here also):

http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=135

Here are some more pics...

http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=215017

Don't waste your time with a 2 wheel drive version.

I've never seen a US 4-door Ranger, do you live south of the border? I think you mean the supercab version with the 2 jump seats in the back yes?

Bad gas mileage? What have you guys been smoking? It got great gas mileage! 20mpg+

And as far as hauling, I hauled everything in mine. I built my house with it and hauled sheetrock, plywood, wood, hauled all kinds of trailers including trailers that weighed more than the truck.

AND it was better than any other truck when it came to a nice back seat. We could use it as a truck or a car. There was no other truck with as nice an interior and back seat. Now there are, but that didn't happen until the Caddy came out with the truck and several makes then upgraded their big truck interiors. My wife loved it and it parked like a dream, not like the full sized trucks. It made the Ridgeline seem like it's poor, slow cousin.

I went out to buy another, but with a slightly powerful motor but they had some deals on the F150 that caused it to be significantly cheaper than the Sport Trac so that's what I bought. Although I like the F150 there are many times I wish I'd gotten another Sport Trac, especially when I'm in parking lots or on the highway.

Ive seen a 4door ranger. Its like sport trac with less polarizing looks and more utility. Probly a less fancy interior, though.

Also, keep in mind you could get a first-gen frontier 4dr with a full-length bed, the only compact pickup with that option sold in the US that im aware of. I like the looks of those too.

Vigo wrote: Ive seen a 4door ranger...

Where in the US did you see this?

Isn't there a "redline" sport-trac or something? Comes with the 4.6L mod motor. Still gets terrible gas mileage, and is about as useful as an escalade (actually, slightly more useful).

The 4.6 in the Sport Trac gets 15 city/21 hwy mpg, that's not bad gas mileage for a truck.

I have had the Escalade and it only got about 7 mpg, which is why I no longer have it.

I personally prefer the 3.0L to the 4.0L. 4.0L have timing chain guide issues and it requires removing the engine to fix along with several special tools and no timing marks.

carguy123 wrote: The 4.6 in the Sport Trac gets 15 city/21 hwy mpg, that's not bad gas mileage for a truck.

When most board members only consider Toyota PUs and Ridgelines to be the Truck equivalent of Miata, all Domestics are gas-guzzling, horribly appointed, weak, overpriced, depreciating, junk, and that's not even getting into the full-sized/compact debate

I've lusted after a Sport Trac since I got my Ranger, and the Adrenaline is pretty cool, but $$$

HiTempguy wrote: Isn't there a "redline" sport-trac or something? Comes with the 4.6L mod motor. Still gets terrible gas mileage, and is about as useful as an escalade (actually, slightly more useful).

I think you may be thinking of the "Adrenaline" line. Monochromatic body means no molding, all I have seen are red, and they actually look pretty cool.

I'd probably still rather have an F150, IMO.

Raze wrote:

carguy123 wrote: The 4.6 in the Sport Trac gets 15 city/21 hwy mpg, that's not bad gas mileage for a truck.

When most board members only consider Toyota PUs and Ridgelines to be the Truck equivalent of Miata, all Domestics are gas-guzzling, horribly appointed, weak, overpriced, depreciating, junk, and that's not even getting into the full-sized/compact debate I've lusted after a Sport Trac since I got my Ranger, and the Adrenaline is pretty cool, but $$$

Looks like they can touch 21-22 on the highway... but not consistently

http://www.fuelly.com/car/ford/explorer%20sport%20trac

btw.. Fuelly is an awesome source for MPG data.. Most people on there really try to get good mileage so you see mainly what a car can do in diffident driving conditions. But be aware most folks on there are interested in showing the best representation of their vehicles.

I believe the poster was asking about the first gen sport trac not a newer one.

Where in the US did you see this?

South Texas, of course.

I get to see all the cool stuff that Mexico gets and we don't.

have you checked out the 4 door colorado and canyon? there are 2wd crew cabs everywhere for sale at your price point. the 4x4's command $ up here where people think they need it in the snow, so the 2wd ones are cheap.

Vigo wrote:

Where in the US did you see this?

South Texas, of course. I get to see all the cool stuff that Mexico gets and we don't.

That is awesome, I would love to see one of the TD Rangers from SAmerica some day, park it in your garage, tow 8000lbs, knock down 30mpg...