I know you can get the S10 with the ZR2 package, and assume there is a similar package for the Ranger. What are the pros/cons of each? Which is better? (I am a big time ford fan, and need some ammunition for my next debate- I guess the best way to learn is to begin the debate here.)

 

I believe the package for the ranger is called the "Edge" package? of is that just another type of ranger? My buddy has a Zr2 s-10 and it was a good truck but it has all kinds of problems now, not due to the truck falling apart but due to the driver

 

I thought the Ranger was available with the FX4 (4x4) package. I believe the Edge package is the 2wd off road package, am I right?

 

The Edge is the model between the XL and XLT and comes in 4x2 and 4x4.

The XLT (top end model) offers to off road packages, the FX4 and FX4 Level Two. The Level Two is really cool with 31" wheels, 5-speed manual and manual transfer case (std. equip.), Bilstein shocks, skid plates, torsen limited-slip rear diff., sport bucket seats, etc. Check it out on Ford's website: http://www.fordvehicles.com/trucks/ranger/

 

Go with the FX4 Level II package, and it'll beat the S10 in almost every aspect..

 

I don't think there are two off-road packages for the Ranger. The 2002 off-road package was called FX4. The 2003 off-road package name was changed to FX4 Level II to distinguish it from the package offered on the F-series trucks.

Basically, you get more with the package for the Ranger than you do with the package for the F-series, and therefore the name was changed to "Level II" to make this known.

So an off-road Ranger is an off-road Ranger. Any Ford Ranger with the off-road package will be a much better truck than a S10 ZR2. The S10 is typical GM....very low quality overall. They look awesome, but they won't hold up for the long run.

 

The GM quality is pretty damn shoddy, but i prefer the Vortec 4.3 to the ford 4.0.

 

Ford should scrap the v6 and just put the 4.6 in the rangers.

 

scrap the 4.0L?

Your kidding right?

(03) 238 ft/lbs at 3k in a V6, I'd say thats awful good.

Even my 00 ranger 4.0L has 225 ft/lbs at 2750

the 4.0 is a great low end torque motor, and I'll go so far as to say that the 4.0L motor is why the ranger is still basically the same best selling reliable compact truck.

If you want hp you better drive a car.

 

There both great trucks!

This is my opinion on compact pickups:

If you want a gutsy truck to tow, offroad and pull stuff, all for an affordable price, get a Ranger.

If you want better handling and comfort, trick it out(BLING, BLING)pay a little more money and get an S-10.

If you want raw power for the track then get a Dakota with the 4.7 or 5.9 V-8.

If you you want great reliability and MPG get a tacoma.

Why would you want a Frontier?



Most people get a compact pickup truck with guts to tow, offroad and pull stuff for an afordable price, thats why the ranger is #1 for countless years.

Greg

 

And my 1985 Bronco II with 228,000 will outlast any new S-Dime sold today. Fords 2.8, the one that didn't suck. (as bad)

 

I gotta say, I thought every S10 I've ever driven/ridden is wasn't as good a ride as a Ranger.. Must be just me.

But I gotta say, no wonder the S10 has more power per pound, it's a lot easier to move 100lbs of plastic than 1000lbs of steel.

 

Really not that impressive. a 3K rpm torque peak for a truck is not good. The 300 I6 makes that much torque near idle, but far less hp, but that is not what is designed for.

Heck, my 1991 dodge with a 2.5L 4 cylinder makes 210 ft/lb at 2000 rpm. It is turboed, but, the ranger motor is a lot bigger.

I'm not dissing on you , or the 4.0, but I have never been impressed with the 4.0's performance in any application.

 

I dont know about the rangers, but my '92 explorer came factory with a really slippery torque converter, allowing it to immediately take advantage of it's torque. It doesn't need to be down real low. Just my $0.02.

 

the 3.0 is the better of the v6s for the ranger anyway, I don;t see too many 4.0s with 400k+ on them.