[EandM]

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/2006-Ford-Ranger-Window-cleaning-Waterfed-pole-System-Van-Pick-up-Truck-Va/293611062703?hash=item445c9545af:g:IS4AAOSw4MBe42Fd


Looks pretty decent.
Is it one of ours ?

[Shrek]

Tbh & imo , it looks crap . Not professional at all , looks like someone who doesn’t pay tax and is hiding the fact they are window cleaning.

[dazmond]

seems a lot of money for a 17 year old vehicle.......

[KS Cleaning]

seems a lot of money for a 17 year old vehicle.......

14 years old.....it’s a 2006 model

[Richard Groves]

That's expensive for 160k on clock and 14 years old regardless of the wfp gear.  Nowt wrong with the set up though. It's all that's needed in a pick up. I don't think it's worth more than 3 grand.

[Dry Clean]

Agree with BK, if got it for the right price then it would more than do the job, the only other thing to consider would be insurance, repair service costs, road tax and mpg.

[Richard Groves]

Description says economical to run   
I had a ranger supercab 2005 bought with 90k on clock for  £3200 . I was lucky to get 23 mpg from it. Sold it 5 years later with 130k for £2400  in February this year.  350 L tank now in a berlingo returning approx 40 mpg. I miss the truck, was the perfect  dual purpose bullet proof work vehicle but definitely far from being economical.

[EandM]

I think £1,400 for the WFP setup is over the top but £3,600 for the truck isn't bad.
Mk3 Rangers are reaching cult status as many on the Ranger forums who want something indestructible aren't keen on the Ford versions post 2011.
£3,600 is more than I'd want to pay for the truck with 160k but is priced pretty well.
There are similar age and mileage on the market for £5-6,000

I paid £2,500 for my 2002 Ranger Supercab nine years ago. A replacement is similar condition would now cost £3,000+

[EandM]

Description says economical to run   
I had a ranger supercab 2005 bought with 90k on clock for  £3200 . I was lucky to get 23 mpg from it. Sold it 5 years later with 130k for £2400  in February this year.  350 L tank now in a berlingo returning approx 40 mpg. I miss the truck, was the perfect  dual purpose bullet proof work vehicle but definitely far from being economical.

2006 onward gets you the common rail engine with another 34 bhp and 25% more torque. They go a lot better, have taller gearing and should do nearer 30 mpg.

My 02 is the same engine as yours was and only does about 24 mpg.

[Richard Groves]

Description says economical to run   
I had a ranger supercab 2005 bought with 90k on clock for  £3200 . I was lucky to get 23 mpg from it. Sold it 5 years later with 130k for £2400  in February this year.  350 L tank now in a berlingo returning approx 40 mpg. I miss the truck, was the perfect  dual purpose bullet proof work vehicle but definitely far from being economical.

2006 onward gets you the common rail engine with another 34 bhp and 25% more torque. They go a lot better, have taller gearing and should do nearer 30 mpg.

My 02 is the same engine as yours was and only does about 24 mpg.

Hadn't realised that 
Just thought it was a slightly later shape, although I preferred the look of mine    guy who bought from me agreed, he didn't like all the plastic trim and chrome bling of later trucks.  Yeah £1400 for the wfp gear is OTT.  A quick guesstimate in my head puts the new price on buying the sum of those parts at approx 700.

[NWH]

What’s he charging 4 grand for that tank and hose reel 🤣🤣,what a load of junk.

[EandM]

Description says economical to run   
I had a ranger supercab 2005 bought with 90k on clock for  £3200 . I was lucky to get 23 mpg from it. Sold it 5 years later with 130k for £2400  in February this year.  350 L tank now in a berlingo returning approx 40 mpg. I miss the truck, was the perfect  dual purpose bullet proof work vehicle but definitely far from being economical.

2006 onward gets you the common rail engine with another 34 bhp and 25% more torque. They go a lot better, have taller gearing and should do nearer 30 mpg.

My 02 is the same engine as yours was and only does about 24 mpg.

Hadn't realised that 
Just thought it was a slightly later shape, although I preferred the look of mine    guy who bought from me agreed, he didn't like all the plastic trim and chrome bling of later trucks.  Yeah £1400 for the wfp gear is OTT.  A quick guesstimate in my head puts the new price on buying the sum of those parts at approx 700.

I prefer the style of the Mk2 to the MK3...too

There are a few marked improvements with the Mk3 including a slightly deeper bed but the gearing is a little bit too high.
They'll cruise at 70 mph in 5th at not much over 2,000 rpm. My Mk2 sits around 3,250 rpm and has a drink problem!

The transmission is a little weak though due to ridiculously tall 1st and 2nd gear which has led to DMF and Clutch failures - especially when used for towing in hilly areas.
Ford said there wasn't a problem but lowered 1st and 2nd gear on the later model and the issues mysteriously went away...

Hopefully, a 09-11 Mk4 should be nearly as indestructible as the Mk2 .

[EandM]

What’s he charging 4 grand for that tank and hose reel 🤣🤣,what a load of junk.

He wants £3,750 for the truck so presumably £1,250 for the WFP or £5,000 in total.
The WFP still sounds like a lot.

[NWH]

Turn the page and keep looking m8.

[Stoots]

Trucks hold their value much better than vans, I was looking for one for ages. 3 to 4k is about right for that.

[Ooooooog]

Unless you’re off-roading, why use a 4x4?
Most of you guys live in towns?

[Richard Groves]

Unless you’re off-roading, why use a 4x4?
Most of you guys live in towns?

That's not the reason ( well wasn't for me anyhow ) They just happen to come with 4x4 ability.  Car and van in one vehicle, one parking space, one road tax, one insurance etc. Far more comfortable to drive than a van in leisure time if you can't run a separate car also.

[EandM]

Unless you’re off-roading, why use a 4x4?
Most of you guys live in towns?

I go off road every day - to and from where I live.
It has has a payload of over 1200 kg.
At the usual 500 kg load nothing actually seems to wear out or break in the last nine years.
Seems virtually indestructible.
Can take the kids to school then go straight to work.
Brilliant in snow or floods.
Great on building sites and solar farms.
Excellent visibility.
Predominantly 2wd but 4wd gets used once a day.
Tows 2.8 tonnes.
Best work vehicle I've had in 34 years.
Fairly simple...like me

[harleyman]

Naff whats he doing  in a disable parking space any way😁

[Stoots]

I think most just buy them because they like the look of them. That and want 5 seats. But it's useful to have 4wd, i go fishing a lot will be pretty good down some of the old pot holed muddy farm tracks I go down on a weekend. You can tow if you want, my dad's got a touring caravan I've been thinking about borrowing. Would be great for going on holiday or camping, biking etc get loads of gear in, all things I do on occasion. Should be fun in the snow if we ever get any.

Just a utility vehicle imo, work, family, play etc.

A van is probably a more practical window cleaning tool, especially if you carry loads of gear...I think trying to argue otherwise would be fooling yourself but I've not had mine out yet cleaning windows, going to start on Monday will see how I get on with it.