So I'm not sure I'd go so far as to say that objectless {rang} is out-and-out wrong,

I specifically said it's not out-and-out wrong, though I didn't use that phrase. It's still wrong, in the sense that if you said it to someone, they'd stop and wonder what the heck you're talking about... oh, okay, I get it, that's a funny word you just used there.

It's weird in the same sense that a verb + -ghach with no intervening suffix is weird. It's wrong, but it's not, strictly speaking, illegal. In English eatation is a perfectly well-formed word created from eat + -ation, meaning the process of eating. But it's not a real word. It's wrong, as wrong as Sopghach is. But if you wanted to make a point and the combination of Sop and -taH (or eat and -ation) made that point perfectly, in the right settings you'd go ahead and say it anyway.

Well, my understanding is that rang without an object is wrong, in the sense that while it doesn't actually break any rules, it's just not used that way. If you had a particular point to make and an objectless rang made that point perfectly, in the right settings you'd just go ahead and say it anyway, but that doesn't make it any less wrong, or "weird."

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name