That sounds about right.
The thing with the ranger is that he seems to rarely hit with both of his attacks But when he rolls well and then rolls good damage he is a monster
I've noticed on the recording that the encounter powers ("Thunder Tusk Boar Strike!!" etc.) which add in the Dex bonus get really obscene. I've got a Two-Weapon Ranger in my group and he whines about not doing enough damage. The "Legolas" archetype got the hookup in 4th edition and the "Aragorn" archetype got boned, it seems.
in a campaign (1 of 4 that i play in) i am currently running a shifter (long tooth) (two bladed) style ranger. and i have to say.. i deal large amounts of damage. i have a +2 bloodclaw long sword, and a +2 cunning scimitar. (i use the scimitar to boost dazed and slowed from my frenzied skirmish ability).
i deal 2 damage to myself, and add +4 to my weapons damage with the long sword. (1d8+3 str, +2 magic, +4 property) for a max of 17 points of damage. (this is not including my hunters quarry, and leather hunter feat (+1d8) and when i am bloodied, and shift. i regen 2 hit points. so the damage just keeps coming. (nice little combo)
with the scimitar it's a bit less. but with my current power list. i have many abilities that can deal out a world of hurt. (jaws of the wolf, frenzied skirmish, disruptive strike. etc..) i feel in general that the ranger is the best striker. needless to say, my DM hates my ranger. lol.
but i feel my DM's pain.. i currently have an Eladrin Ranger that wields a greatbow in my campaign...a d12 per arrow... pure madness..