Only thing about K&N that I haven't found anywhere else, they last FOREVER, they out last the vehicle 9 times out of 10 and you can't beat that with a stick.
I have, however, heard of people cleaning theirs and it having left over oil on it an the oil being sucked onto the MAF sensor (on vehicles equipped) and it causing problems, but they could just be idiots and didn't clean it right. (After all, the world today is full of'em...)

I have to agree with everyone else, a good flowing, freely breathing exhaust system is one of the best "bang for the buck" mods you can do.. And if your state has no emissions, I always take out the CAT, it helped my 3.0 ranger with 300,000+ miles a TON and on top of that with the stock muffler, it sounded like a little tank.

I'm running true duals with glasspacks and no CATs on my 96, I'm afraid to know what the MPG's would be if it still had stock exhaust...

 

The ONLY thing I do not like about having a dual tank Ranger, is that the spare has to be carried in the bed. Since I run 31x10.50s, the spare takes a lot of room, at least I have a 7ft bed.

 

That's exactly right, i have a factory mounting bracket for the spare, in the front of the bed, on the drivers side, i run LT195/75/14's so the spare fits pretty nicely.

 

I had to modify mine to take the 31, it was too big.
I am guilty of running with no spare a good portion of time because I need the bed space...........someday, it will catch up with me.

 

Are you over on the Ranger station too? The Ranger Station - Your Ultimate Ranger Resource i don't post there much but i like the tech articles over there.

 

Same here, they are a great tech resource with their library.......but the forum itself is over-run by juvenile idiots.

 

Michael - yes, consensus is that improving the flow will improve the power and efficiency. I have some time yet on my stock exhaust, but the next system will be that or better (better is my hope). There's always the risk though that an aftermarket solution will detract from the designed performance, so I'm hoping that through my investigation and feedback from you and others, I'll find the solution. Good feedback on the K&N - sounds like it may outlast the truck through my ownership anyway. I bit pricey, so we'll see what the others have to say on this too. Thanks again for the input!

Kevin

 

K&N air filter-one of the things I considered is it would pay for itself over the life of the truck because I would no longer be buying new air filters. After installing (and the small mod I made to the air tube) the ranger had more "spunk" and mpg went up a little although I do not remember how much.

Aftermarket exhaust-I have not done this yet. I need to do it for inspection next year. If gas hits $5/gal I will do it sooner.
However, on a 91 wrangler, I replaced the cat converter(broken internally and clogging up) and added a aftermarket exhaust. It made a big difference. I know it's not a good comparision (how much improvement was from replacing the cat vs exhaust), but it convinced me to upgrade.

 

Thanks Grumpy. In another life, I used to rent various makes of SUVs. The Jeep/Chrysler products always had the best ride but the worst on gas. I suspect that your upgrade on the Wrangler paid for itself...perhaps a few times.

Kevin

 

my current ranger is a '93 supercab 4x4. 4.0 ohv V6, 5 speed manual, 3.73 gears, manual hubs, 235-15 tires and weighs in at 4,300 pounds. has a cap, grille guard, tube steps and receiver hitch helping add to the weight. bed mounted spare. gutted cat. best ever fuel milage was 19.5 mostly avereges about 16-18. winter is 15 at very best. the first ranger was similar, a '88 supercab 2wd with the 2.3 four, 5 speed manual, 3.73 gears, 205-14 tires, cap,grille guard and trailer hitch. weighed about 3,500 pounds. best ever was 28, most of the time got about 20-23. gutted cat also. the 2.3 was gutless when it came to long upgrades or towing over 1,500 pounds. just doesnt have the tourque. the 4.0 has been plenty of motor, and while not as effeceint, its still reasonable enough on fuel to drive daily.

 

Racsan,

I used to commute with a fellow who had a Toyota 4X4 ('95 or 96). His mileage was about the same as your '93. We used to split the daily commutes, but my Ranger was far better on gas. What I can't recall was whether or not he had the 4 or 6 cyl. I'm actually thinking 4 because as I recall, we were comparing a 4 to a 4 cyl. Given your business and hauling requirements, you are probably set up pretty well. Your 'rig' appears to be in fine shape.

Kevin

 

once my flywheel is fixed my little 83 ranger diesel gets between 30-38.and 28-32 on wvo

 

Welcome to FTE kerry36. It seems you and Montana have plenty to smile about these days!

 

Not sure if you checked the Mazda diesel forum yet today, but a fellow member just posted this in a new thread.... "I may have an extra one but i dont know if i want to sell it or not. I keep spare parts on hand alot so incase anything like that is to happen so ill have to debate about selling one. I did call this place Orient Auto Parts & Recycling USA-OR(Gresham) 877-663-1909....they said they have one off a 82 mazda and said 100 bucks with shipping to your house....kind of steep price but if you need it i suppose it is what it is"

 

thanks for the info guys I'll have to check it out. I was wondering if I could just take the ring gear off and have one made