by "Tripper" (tripe46)
Published 04/05/2017 at 14:58
by "Tripper" (tripe46)
Published 04/05/2017 at 14:58
No Tags
STARS: 1
I want a little pickup truck. I have been wanting one for a while and I must have been pretty vocal about it recently because last night I said, “I want a little pickup truck.” Mrs. Tripper said, “Then GET one!”
I was originally looking for something
really
small, like a Ford courier or something of a similar vintage/form factor. However I decided that I don’t want a project, I want a truck that I can use and buy parts for.
I’ve mentioned before that I had an 87' Ranger called “Tan Stan” (pictured below) that we both loved. It needed a head gasket, or a pan gasket I can’t remember. We couldn’t find anyone who would do the work, so I donated it and have missed it ever since. Which really cheeses me out because now I definitely know someone who would take the job, and or would be confident turning a wrench on my own.
So what say Oppo? What’s good/bad on the ranger? I’ll be looking for a 3 pedal V6 with 4x4 as a desired option but not a deal breaker. Want to spend less than 10k, but would be happier spending 5-7k. I prefer a longer bed to extra seating.
If there are other options that you think are better, what are they? I know the Taco is the king of small trucks, but they’re too fancy for me.
"Shamoononon drives like a farmer" (shamoononon)
04/05/2017 at 15:04, STARS: 0
I LOVE the Ranger. Ironically I have one in my garage that needs gasket work too. Lent it to someone who never put any oil in it.... that asshole.
"Dr. Zoidberg - RIP Oppo" (thetomselleck)
04/05/2017 at 15:05, STARS: 0
Anecdotes:
I drove a ‘92 Ranger for two years at my last job, 5-speed 4 banger. I loved it.
My friend owned a ‘96 Ranger for 13 years. Had the dreadful Vulcan. Good enough truck, but transmission started to fail around 200k miles.
Newer ones are crazy expensive.
I would really recommend the 4.0 with a stick, or an older 4 banger.
"RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht" (ramblininexile)
04/05/2017 at 15:07, STARS: 0
A family member had a 2000ish one as a work truck. I liked it.
"Justin Hughes" (justinhughes54)
04/05/2017 at 15:07, STARS: 0
I know it’ll rally. http://v8rallyranger.com/
Don’t know where you are, but watch for rust. A buddy of mine had a mid-90s Mazda B3000 (same truck, small V6) 4x4. I forget exactly what went wrong, but it got to a point where the 4WD got so rusted (and she did use it) that she could either go thousands more miles in 2WD, or maybe 10 miles in 4WD before it self destructed. That was the point where she got rid of the truck.
I put tens of thousands of miles on 2WD stick Rangers doing courier work, since that’s what the company used in our fleet. Good little truck. One Christmas Eve I hit a deer on the interstate. Blew the airbag. Killed the deer. I was fine. Insurance totaled the truck, probably because it had 405k miles. A friend of mine bought the “wreck” from the company for $200. He put another $200 of parts into it and put it back on the road as his daily driver.
"Highlander-Datsuns are Forever" (jamesbowland)
04/05/2017 at 15:08, STARS: 2
You would be better off with a Nissan or Toyota from a similar era. They did make base models of the taco and the nissan and they are out there on the list of craigs.
"Cé hé sin" (michael-m-mouse)
04/05/2017 at 15:10, STARS: 1
I know that I can buy a new one and you can’t...
"HammerheadFistpunch" (hammerheadfistpunch)
04/05/2017 at 15:10, STARS: 2
they are susceptible to ditches
"Tripper" (tripe46)
04/05/2017 at 15:11, STARS: 1
Wow! Yea I only spent $1000 on the 87' that I had and would have spent another thousand to fix it. 4x4 isn’t a must and ill scrap it if its a liability. We’ve got a Subaru and an Audi.
"Tripper" (tripe46)
04/05/2017 at 15:13, STARS: 0
Yea but I don’t want a new one.
"Under_Score" (tomtheatum)
04/05/2017 at 15:14, STARS: 0
I used to have a 2007 model. It had several crazy problems, especially for a vehicle with under 100,000 miles, but it was a good little truck. My RAV4 now is much nicer and it suits my needs.
"Tripper" (tripe46)
04/05/2017 at 15:14, STARS: 8
Gave that ditch a ranger, ditches love rangers
"Nibbles" (nibbles)
04/05/2017 at 15:14, STARS: 1
1st and 2nd Gen Dakotas, preferably 1991-2000. I may be biased but hear me out
Your choice of I4, V6 or V8 with manual transmission
Lack of Mopar auto means near bulletproof :)
Out-haul the competition while retaining fuel economy
>My ‘95 4x4 V8 manual returns 18.5 mixed
>V6 models can see 25-26. No, really
Stupdenously simple to work on
They’ll run on absolute shit gas and all you’ll hear from ‘em is a slight groan from time to time
And finally, ‘90s Mopar stigma leads to incredibly reasonable prices for these trucks. Just shy away from the automatics and 4.7L models and you should be in great shape :)
"diplodicus" (diplodicus)
04/05/2017 at 15:21, STARS: 0
My first car was a POS 91 Ranger 5spd. I beat the shit out of it but it just wouldn’t die I miss it a lot.
My mom had an 06 with the 2.3L duratec and 5spd. Nothing really remarkable about it. Absolutely terrible in the snow. Ford decided for some reason to put the fuel pump cutoff switch in the passenger foot well. I had a few friends hit it with their feet while we were driving.
"jimz" (jimz)
04/05/2017 at 15:23, STARS: 0
I have a 2011 Sport 4x4. The good is it’s not as much of a chore as lugging around a full-size truck. plus most of it had been around in other Ford vehicles for some time (4.0 V6, 5R55, 8.8" axles, etc.) where there aren’t really many common failure points. Also, it’s held its value. I paid $21k and change for it 3-1/2 years ago with 15,000 miles on it, and I could probably sell it tomorrow for $16-$17,000.
on the down side, the Sport 4x4 Supercab was the heaviest PN150 Ranger ever made, and the fuel economy is crap (16-18 mpg) and the brake pads don’t last for shit. I’ve got 82,000 on it now and it’s on its third set of brake pads and second set of rotors.
"Dr. Zoidberg - RIP Oppo" (thetomselleck)
04/05/2017 at 15:27, STARS: 3
You post is biased and you should feel bad.
[Has 30 open tabs of Toyotas for sale]
"That Bastard Kurtis - An Attempt to Standardize My Username Across Platforms" (thatbastardkurtis5)
04/05/2017 at 15:28, STARS: 0
If you’re fat like me or even remotely tall get an extra cab. I do not fit well in a regular cab Ranger.
"Tripper" (tripe46)
04/05/2017 at 15:29, STARS: 0
Hmm, the one that is the closest to me is a 2011 RWD 4banger. They want $9500, and it’s got just a smidge under 100k.
fuel econ/wear parts aren’t a huge concern as the it probably wont see more than 5k miles per year. I’m mostly curious as to where the “sweet spot” is. Do I spend 10k, or can I spend 5 and still get a very reliable truck?
I spent $1000 on my 87" and it was all that I needed, but it didn’t last long.
"itschrome" (itschrome)
04/05/2017 at 15:31, STARS: 0
it’s a super old truck. that 2011 and that 87 are basically the same thing. this means they are cheap to run and easy to fix. the 4.0 is the move. the 4 banger is weak and the 3.0 just makes noise and burns gas more than i moves the truck forward. i drove a early 2000's side step with the vulcan for a few years it was miserable.. but use full at the same time
"Tripper" (tripe46)
04/05/2017 at 15:31, STARS: 0
I’m 5'10" 170. It was tight in my 87, but not uncomfortable.
"jimz" (jimz)
04/05/2017 at 15:32, STARS: 0
Given the way they’re holding value, I’d say $9k or so is about right for the configuration you want. Might find one or two with a smidge more miles for $8k.
"Spaceball-Two" (spaceball-two)
04/05/2017 at 15:32, STARS: 1
My first car was an 84 just like Stan up there. Painted in Napa auto parts blue. I could watch the paint wash away when it was getting a bath. Fun, lightweight and pretty quick. The engine eventually grenaded though.
"Tripper" (tripe46)
04/05/2017 at 15:33, STARS: 0
What years have the 4.0? Are there years were both the 3.0 and the 4.0 were available?
"vicali" (vicali)
04/05/2017 at 15:33, STARS: 1
One of my good friends had an 84 2wd - we took it way way farther into the bush than it had any right to go;
We used to get lost hiking and be so glad to see that little truck..
One of the Forestry Companies I worked for got rid of all their Tacomas for Rangers because they were cheaper to buy.. Within 2 years half the Rangers were crashed or broken, and the crews hated them. They swapped the rest for Tacomas again.
The Rangers had a nasty habit of getting loose on little bumps, washboard gravel was the worst, but I had one try to go sideways on me going down the highway..
"Jonee" (Jonee)
04/05/2017 at 15:34, STARS: 1
I’ve had a ‘98 and an ‘02, and they were terrific trucks. Easy to live with and work on. The ‘98 had the V6. Terrible mileage for a small truck, but plenty of oomph. My ‘02 had a Duratec 4 cylinder and I really liked that truck. I didn’t do much towing, so it was perfect. Some people think those are underpowered, but with a manual transmission, I thought it was fine.
"itschrome" (itschrome)
04/05/2017 at 15:35, STARS: 0
yes they all co exist. it had the 2.3 4, the 3.0 v6 and the 4.0 v6. the 2.3 and 3.0 are the most common.
"Tripper" (tripe46)
04/05/2017 at 15:38, STARS: 0
Yea mine met a similar fate. I was bouncing on down the highway, looked at the speedo and it was past 80! I thought, “Damn! I didn’t know this little truck had it in it.” then it sounded bad and spat black smoke everywhere...
"Tripper" (tripe46)
04/05/2017 at 15:41, STARS: 0
I found one 4.0, 4x4, 5 speed. 120k miles, they want 7k. It’s also two hours away.
"Tripper" (tripe46)
04/05/2017 at 15:44, STARS: 0
Lot’s of people warning to stay away from the 4cyl and 3.0 6cyl. There is only one 4.0, manual, 4x4 that is kind of close to me (two hours). Its a blue 2003 with 120k for $7k.
"Spaceball-Two" (spaceball-two)
04/05/2017 at 15:54, STARS: 0
This was back in the mid 90's, I think I paid $600 for it. It was the foreman’s truck for a utility company. No floor mats, no carpet, no nothing. Just a bench a wheel and pedals. He would use it to bounce between sites making sure his guys were doing their job. That thing took a beating.
"Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer" (smallbear94)
04/05/2017 at 15:57, STARS: 0
"jimz" (jimz)
04/05/2017 at 15:58, STARS: 0
which 4-cyl? The old 2.5 is a no-power dog, but 2001+ ones have the 2.3 liter DOHC Duratec.
"That Bastard Kurtis - An Attempt to Standardize My Username Across Platforms" (thatbastardkurtis5)
04/05/2017 at 16:20, STARS: 0
The one I was in was whatever year is the newest US Ranger, which I’d imagine is a bit bigger inside than an ‘87. I’m 5'11 and I could never get my legs in there comfortably, but that could also be because I’m fat.
"j250ex" (j250ex)
04/05/2017 at 16:37, STARS: 0
Tacoma cost a little bit more but its way better built than the ranger
"Tripper" (tripe46)
04/05/2017 at 16:43, STARS: 0
Is the 3.0 really terrible? I only ask because the most desirable truck close to me is a 3.0.
"Logansteno: Bought a VW?" (logansteno)
04/05/2017 at 17:13, STARS: 0
Why not S10?
I paid $4200 for my ‘02 4.3 5-speed RWD with 68k on it. Zero rust and absolutely mint.
If it’s a Ford vs GM thing then I understand, the Ranger held spot #2 on my list if I couldn’t find a nice S10. I like both of them pretty equally. The 4.0 is definitely a must. $10k should get you a basically mint one but since they didn’t really change much post-2000 I don’t know if it’d be worth spending that much.
"TheRealBicycleBuck" (therealbicyclebuck)
04/05/2017 at 17:25, STARS: 0
Get the Mazda version. You will get more bang for your buck.
By the way, I drove one almost daily for 18 years. It’s now it’s now 23 years old with 269,000 miles and still running. I haven’t the heart to sell it yet.
"Tripper" (tripe46)
04/05/2017 at 17:26, STARS: 0
S10 isn’t out of the question. I’m just familiar/comfortable with Ford. Finding the engine I want is proving to be the most difficult. 3.0 sucks huh? Found one close for 5k that ticks all of the boxes but has the 3.0
"Tripper" (tripe46)
04/05/2017 at 17:29, STARS: 0
They’re harder to come by at least near me
"Logansteno: Bought a VW?" (logansteno)
04/05/2017 at 17:34, STARS: 1
The 3.0 is S L O W, but I think it’s supposed to be pretty reliable. If you can look past 150 horsepower then the 3.0 should be OK.
"TheRealBicycleBuck" (therealbicyclebuck)
04/05/2017 at 20:46, STARS: 0
The 3.0 doesn’t have a lot of room for growth, but if your goal is big power, you might as well plan for a 5.0 swap out of an Explorer. If you want reliability, the 3.0 is fine. As I mentioned before, mine has 269,000 miles on the original engine.
Distributors last about 135,000 miles. Same with the clutch. Timing is a chain instead of a belt. I had some suspension issues at 250k. Suspension bushing/bearings should be replaced before then. If you get a five-speed, check the inspection port plug for cracking. Fifth gear slings transmission fluid onto the plug, so if it fails on a long trip, enough fluid will be flung out to cause transmission failure (I learned this one the hard way). The shop I used for the repair replaced the rubber plug with a freeze plug.
If you find one that is running roughly, check the plastic intake for cracks, especially in the accordion section immediately before the intake manifold. Cracks let air in after the MAF, causing it to run rough.
If you have specific questions, just ask.
"TheD0k_2many toys 2little time" (thed0ck)
04/06/2017 at 00:49, STARS: 0
reliable. parts are easy to get. they made a ton of them. My dad has a 2010 2wd and its been great for him
"Denver Is Stuck In The 90s" (denver80222)
04/06/2017 at 17:48, STARS: 0
AMA
"Denver Is Stuck In The 90s" (denver80222)
04/06/2017 at 17:49, STARS: 0
the 3.0 only had that much hp in the DOHC variant, post-1998. The older 3.0s were 120 hp
"Logansteno: Bought a VW?" (logansteno)
04/06/2017 at 18:01, STARS: 0
There was never a DOHC 3.0L in the Ranger. Vulcan was always pushrod and the Ranger never got a Duratec.
Also, 120hp? Are you sure?
"Denver Is Stuck In The 90s" (denver80222)
04/06/2017 at 18:18, STARS: 0
Im talking tbi, pre obdII 3.0s.
"Tripper" (tripe46)
04/06/2017 at 18:25, STARS: 0
Early 2000's 4.0 6 cyl or 2011 4 cyl?
Do I want 4x4?
What would your “ease of wrenchin’” rating be? If you’re into that sort of thing.
How would you be looking to spec your Ranger sub $10k?
"Logansteno: Bought a VW?" (logansteno)
04/06/2017 at 18:25, STARS: 0
I say again, are you suuuuure?
95 is pre-OBDII, 94 definitely is.
"Denver Is Stuck In The 90s" (denver80222)
04/07/2017 at 01:10, STARS: 0
4.0Ls are great, Ive got an OHV 4.0 in my 93. And 4x4 is eh. Mines 2wd with an LSD in the back and I do okay. Also you want a stick, trust me. Ford autos are terrible. Also the later 4cyls aren’t awful. And ease of wrenching.... its a Ford so expect some stupid designs but all in all I don’t have any trouble wrenching on mine. Ive only taken it to the shop for alignments, ball joints and a catalytic converter. Ive done everything else myself
"Denver Is Stuck In The 90s" (denver80222)
04/07/2017 at 02:49, STARS: 0
Ford measured at the crank back then. Whats 145hp minus 20%? about 120
"Tripper" (tripe46)
04/07/2017 at 08:17, STARS: 0
Awesome thanks! I’m not even considering an auto, so no worries there. RWD options are definitely more plentiful. I’m leaning toward the 2011 at the moment, mainly because dealer communication has been poor with the 2003 4.0. Neither are close to me, and their aren’t a ton of options out there. So I may wait a few weeks and see if anything else pops up.
"Scott" (merl3noir)
04/11/2017 at 17:07, STARS: 1
All I know is everyone I know that has owned one loved it.
"Slant6" (slant-6)
04/13/2017 at 18:20, STARS: 0
Alternatively for my Ranger:
I paid $1200 for my ‘02 3.0 5-speed RWD with 168k on it. Zero rust and absolutely a truck.
Also you’re right about the Vulcan thing, Denver seems a bit confused.