hey guys,
so my civic was recently hit and totaled and the insurance company is going to give me about 3,800 for it, and i have decided that its finally time that I can own a truck. I know i want a manual transmission, and most likely a 4 cylinder, but now i have to decide which engine to get. is there much of a difference between the 2.3 and 2.5 engines. one other thing, i don't plan of doing any serious mudding, but i do need to get to fishing/hunting spots, and was wondering how the 2 wheel drive rangers do in mud? thanks for the help

 

one other thing, i drive about 400 miles a week and am a little concerned about how the 4 cylinder engine will handle that, would a 6 cylinder be a better option, what type of gas mileage can i expect from a 6 cylinder? the truck will be used mainly to get to school and work, which is about 65 miles each way, and I'd just be using it for fishing/ hunting on the weekends thanks again

 

If you get one with decent amount of miles on it, and the truck isn't already beat to death, it will handle the driving you describe as well as the civic. And a 4x4 is always better off road, mine is a 93 stx with 3.0 v6, 5spd, and it gets 22-24.

 

The 2.5 is the exact same engine as the 2.3 with a longer stroke. These are known as being one of Fords most reliable engines, maybe even more so then the 300 sixes. Keep in mind that they are a bit underpowered in a full framed truck. I don't have any issues keeping up with traffic on our interstates, but I live in an extremely flat state.

The Ranger in my signature gets a consistent 27 mpg with over 200k on the original engine. She's been 100% reliable for my 80 mile daily commute.

If you live in a rust prone area, check the leaf spring hangers, shackles, shackle mounts and rear cab mounts. These are known problem areas for Rangers

 

thanks for the replies guys, I live in St. Louis Mo, we don't have a lot of real big hills, but it definitely isn't flat around here. My civic has a 4 popper engine, it keeps up with traffic just fine, but when me and my two brothers are in it, you can really feel the difference. garthneddy, the cars aren't prone to a lot of rust I'll be sure to check out the rust prone areas that you described.

 

how easy are these engines to work on? I'm 21, and don't have to much experience working on cars, I've changed my oil, brakes and I just recently replaced my radiator, but that's about as far as I've gone, but I'd like to learn more.

 

They're as easy to work on as any other older pickup. The only thing that comes to mind is a plug change. 4 of the plugs are easily accessible and should give you no problem. The other 4 plugs will require either an elaborate network of swivels, extensions and steady hands or you can pull the intake manifold.

 

thanks. my brother is trying to convince me that I should get the 6 cylinder engine cause it will have more power and all, but I'm just wondering is the difference in power in the 6 cylinder enough to justify the lose of 5 or so miles per gallon that I would have in the 4 cylinder?

 

If you opt for the V-6, go straight to the 4.0........
3.0 V-6 is a good motor, but the 4.0 gives a LOT more grunt for negligible mpg loss.

 

old93junk, would you happen to have an estimation of the mpg that the 4.0 would get?all of this help is really appreciated.

 

We have had a bunch of Rangers and IMO the best combo for reasonable milage and reasonable power is the 3.0/5-speed combo with 3.45 - 3.55 gears. We had a 2.3/5-speed and while it did get good milage it was a gutless wonder that could not maintain highway speeds into any kind of a headwind or up even a slight grade, but it was also crippled with a 3.08 axle so maybe it would have been a little better with a little more gear. That said the 3.0 trucks are within a mpg or two of the 4-banger and make a lot more power so I think it's worth the tradeoff. The 4.0L will drink you out of house and home.. you will get better milage from a 4.9L fullsize truck.

 

My Explorer with 4.0 averages 18 city and 24 hwy, in the Ranger it may differ slightly.
My 2.3 Ranger avg's 24-25 hwy/city combo about 27 all hwy.

 

Huh, the other sources that I have gone to were saying that if I got a 6 cylinder I should expect about 18-20, but if people are getting 24, that makes a bit of a difference to me. is that explorer a 2 wheel drive or 4 wheel?

 

4x4.......I believe part of it may be that Explorers offer different gear ratio axles than Rangers, although being very similar vehicles.
That 24.2 mpg was on a stretch of nothing but highway, from Bend Oregon to Boise ID, quite a few high passes involved, so coasting down cancelled the guzzling up hill runs.
On my 80 mile round trip commute, which involves a grand total of 4 stop lights, it gets about 22-23 mpg.

 

most of all of my driving is all highway miles, so that could work out for me. well thanks for all of the help guys, I definitely appreciate it, I'm gonna do more research on the different engines and hopefully have a truck in the near future.