1997 - 2003 F150 1997-2003 F150, 1997-1999 F250LD, 7700 & 2004 F150 Heritage

late 90's- early 2000s f150 or ranger?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #1  
Old 04-25-2013, 11:08 PM
Wesley901's Avatar
Wesley901
Wesley901 is offline
Freshman User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Under your pillow.
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
late 90's- early 2000s f150 or ranger?

I'm selling my bronco tomorrow morning and hopefully getting another job here soon, I wanted to either get a late 90's to early 2000s f150 or ranger. I don't really tow anything, maybe a really small uhaul trailer once a year, so nothing big. I go offroading and shooting a lot, and I don't haul a whole lot in the bed, sure , I run the occasional couch of mattress to a friends, that kinda stuff, but its not like i haul a bed full of rocks are something.

So at this point I'm thinking a ranger, but what are your guys input on this?
 
  #2  
Old 04-28-2013, 09:30 AM
flamingx's Avatar
flamingx
flamingx is offline
New User
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As somebody that used to run a Ford Ranger club, I'm a little impartial to the smaller truck. But I have also owned effies. Rangers do have some good off-road capabilities, the idea that they get better mileage however is a myth, the slight bit that they may be better is barely noticeable. The main advantage to the smaller truck is that you can get into tighter spots with it (i.e. while off-road or in mall parking lots)

I know you mentioned that you rarely tow but in those years your looking at, the Sport 4x4 with the 4.0 has the same rated tow cap. as an f150 with a 4.6 and 3.73 gears (7000lbs)
 
  #3  
Old 04-28-2013, 01:25 PM
Bluegrass 7's Avatar
Bluegrass 7
Bluegrass 7 is offline
Lead Driver
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,806
Likes: 0
Received 93 Likes on 74 Posts
Truck size for size and capability, I feel the Ranger is over priced for what you get.
Anything but a 4 cylinder manuel 2 wd won't be much better on fuel mileage.
Good luck.
 
  #4  
Old 04-28-2013, 02:57 PM
flamingx's Avatar
flamingx
flamingx is offline
New User
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bluegrass 7
Truck size for size and capability, I feel the Ranger is over priced for what you get.
Depends on your area, up here in the land of salted roads and rusty rockers Rangers stand up to it way better then effies and are a dime a dozen, where if you can actually find a 10+ yr old F150 that isn't rotten beyond repair you pay an arm and a leg.
 
  #5  
Old 05-01-2013, 10:01 AM
Wesley901's Avatar
Wesley901
Wesley901 is offline
Freshman User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Under your pillow.
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm not worried about mpg. Just what will last longer and be more reliable.
 
  #6  
Old 05-02-2013, 10:50 AM
Bilster's Avatar
Bilster
Bilster is offline
New User
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In case you aren't aware, the 1997-1998 F150 4.2 had a intake manifold gasket problem that has left many a truck stranded do to hydrolock. Affected some 250,000 F150s....and counting. My low mileage 1997 died last year and I actually purchase a very nice 1998 that hydrolocked just so I could do a V8 swap. Very happy with that.
 
  #7  
Old 05-02-2013, 11:35 AM
Wesley901's Avatar
Wesley901
Wesley901 is offline
Freshman User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Under your pillow.
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bilster
In case you aren't aware, the 1997-1998 F150 4.2 had a intake manifold gasket problem that has left many a truck stranded do to hydrolock. Affected some 250,000 F150s....and counting. My low mileage 1997 died last year and I actually purchase a very nice 1998 that hydrolocked just so I could do a V8 swap. Very happy with that.
How bout the 98-2005 rangers?
 
  #8  
Old 05-03-2013, 10:21 AM
Bilster's Avatar
Bilster
Bilster is offline
New User
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My brother has a 2003 Ranger with over 205,000 and still going strong.
 
  #9  
Old 05-03-2013, 11:31 AM
fordcrzymike's Avatar
fordcrzymike
fordcrzymike is offline
Elder User
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Tamaroa, IL
Posts: 990
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Rangers are pretty bullet proof. My cousins 95 has around 200k and still going strong (3.0 5spd) he beats the living **** out of it. actually he just broke a leaf spring because he over loads it so much, but the drive train runs perfect. Rangers are great, but I personally just like full size trucks. As mentioned, the 4x4 4.0 rangers don't get any better mileage than the 150s my 97 4.6 4x4 gets close to 17 in the summer, very similar to what a 4x4 4.0 ranger would get. my cousin says he gets about 20-22 with his 3.0 5spd
 
  #10  
Old 05-04-2013, 12:50 PM
Wesley901's Avatar
Wesley901
Wesley901 is offline
Freshman User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Under your pillow.
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'll probably get a ranger then, in this area a early 2000 ranger is a little cheaper and less beat up then a 150. My dream is to have a 350, like my brothers, but that's not practical for me, and to costly.
 
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ford_trucks893
1983 - 2012 Ranger & B-Series
30
09-15-2012 12:42 PM
Diesel_Brad
1983 - 2012 Ranger & B-Series
43
02-11-2011 06:39 PM
HappyJack
Kansas Chapter
4
06-26-2006 08:20 AM
Notpilbrisk
1983 - 2012 Ranger & B-Series
14
12-01-2005 10:31 PM
Northguy
1983 - 2012 Ranger & B-Series
11
04-22-2005 06:25 PM



Quick Reply: late 90's- early 2000s f150 or ranger?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:58 PM.