Daytime running LED's fitted

Not the best pic - will take some in a better location with less sunlight later. Look damned good in the flesh though..........

Still not the best pic (will do better, honest)

Very nice, how's she running?

Running great pal.

33k on the clock now (fron 2.5k when I bought in Jan).

Not missed a beat, doesn't use a drop of oil, still on all 4 original tyres and returning 30mpg.

I reckon I'll keep it for 2 years in total, so it will be up to about 80k and then get a Nav.

Trouble is, this truck is that bloody good I may even be tempted to get another. The new Ranger looks good, but it will be over-priced and as per usual Ford don't seem to match the opposition in the BHP stakes.

I kind of agree but im not sure i'd go down the Nav route even though i own one i'm more than interested in the VW at the mo even though i've just bought an RRS but thats another story

RRS??

The VW does look lovely, although there are moans of it being a 2l - surely you can get enough torque & BHP out of a 2l lump though?

Being VW it will cost a small fortune though.

Why not the Nav? Reliability?

Here's another attempt, but I just can't seem to portray how good they look via the camera..........

Range Rover Sport bud There is better trucks than the Nav, i still love it but its old hat now, its been around for 5 years and everthing else has caught up!!

I'm hearing ya.

I quite like the new Ranger and think the 3.2L producing 197BHP and 470Nm will be more than enough to keep one satisified. and then there is always chipping to make it a wee bit more.

Lol - driving 40k+ a year, I doubt I'll be buying anything with a 3.2l lump.

30mpg in my current truck costs me around £120 a week at the moment.

In fact it'll be interesting to see if the 2l twin turbo Amarok actually returns the stated 36mpg, as that would make it very tempting

Hi sparky......lights look really good mate.......

Dc

SparkyDave wrote:Lol - driving 40k+ a year, I doubt I'll be buying anything with a 3.2l lump.

30mpg in my current truck costs me around £120 a week at the moment.

In fact it'll be interesting to see if the 2l twin turbo Amarok actually returns the stated 36mpg, as that would make it very tempting

There is a 2.2L engine in the new ones too but I would think the larger engine should be cheap to run as it wont have to work as hard.
I'm hearing in the consumption fact though. I average 60k a year and my current Nav being a Euro 4 spec auto isn't the kindest on diesel (26MPG). I have to say that's one thing I miss about the Merc Vito I had previously. (115 with 2.2L chipped to 130kw and returned 39MPG)

the RRS does an average of 28 MPG !!