Hey all, I'm looking into buying an older Ranger. Most likely a late 90s with OBD2, a Lima 2.3l, and a 5-speed. I'm just getting one for fuel economy so that I'm not driving my F-350 all the time, so the 2.3l seems to be my best option. I'm also looking mostly at extended cab trucks since I'm 6'2" and room is nice. I don't need to load it heavy since I've got my big truck for that. It'll see up to about 1300 lbs towing with 170lbs or less tongue weight tops, and maybe as much as 400-500 pounds in the bed on occasion. I don't need to run over 55 MPH while towing, so I think I should be okay. When I looked up ratings, the 2.3l, 5-speed, 3.45 gear combo is rated at up to 1600lbs towing. It'll run empty 75% of the time. What should I look for when checking out these trucks? Are there any weak points or common issues with these trucks that'll I should be checking for? Are there any years that had certain quirks?

I'm very familiar with the larger trucks, but not so much with these Rangers. Is the 2.3 a good engine? I hear people all the time talking about Rangers with 300k+ miles on them, but I don't know what combos they're running.

Thanks in advance!

 

The 2.3L is a pretty decent engine, just doesn't have a lot of power. Somewhere around 97-98, it was stroked to a 2.5L, which gave it a bit more torque. Both have belt driven camshafts, but don't let this deter you, as there is very little chance of any damage occurring if the belt should fail. Just line everything up and put a new belt (tensioner is a good idea) and you're good to go.
Starting with 94, Ford built the Mazda trucks on the same assembly line as the Ranger, and they share everything but a few sheetmetal parts. These can sometimes be found for less money than a Ranger, with similar equipment and miles.
I've got nearly 180K on my 95 B2300 (2.3L/5 speed/3.45 axle) and it still runs strong (as strong as it ever did) and gets 26-28 MPG hyw. Not the greatest tow rig, but I have towed a car with it a few times. 55MPH and forget 5th exists, and it does surprisingly well. I have heard of many people with 300-400K on the 2.3L.
OBD-II started in 94 (california) and 95 (federal) on the 2.3L. The 95+ models have better brakes, due to dual piston front calipers. These factors make the 95+ models a bit more desireable.
The only real "quirk" or downside, is the blend door on factory A/C models. It can break, causing the HVAC system to not function well. Non A/C and dealer installed A/C seldom have this issue, due to cable operated blend door, rather than the electric motor to operate it.
The clutch hydraulics can get pricey to repair, due to the slave being inside the bellhousing, requiring the trans to be dropped should it need servicing.
The 5 speed trans needs the fluid (ATF) changed on a regular basis (30-60K, depending on how it's used) or the trans can be hard to shift, particularly when cold. Left alone too long, and the trans could need replaced.

 

Very good info. Thanks! I'll check into some with the 2.5 too. I'm not worried about it lacking power. I've got my lifted F-350 that I've built for when I want power. 425 HP 468 ci to get my jollies when needed, haha.

It looks to me that in the generations of truck that I'm looking at they're all around the same prices (obviously with some variation on condition) whether it's Ford or Mazda badged. All decent ones from the 90s around $2000 to $4000 depending on the body condition and mileage. Honestly, I tend to like the look of the Ranger over the Mazda.

Good to hear. About in line with other MPG numbers I've heard.

That's expected though with an I4 and a 3.45 axle. I don't need it to tow more than about 1300, so no big deal. I may add a helper spring to each side in the back depending on how much sag it has with a 500lb bed load or a trailer.

It's going to be a whole new world with this compared to what I'm used to. I can load 3k lbs in the bed of my F-350 with add-a-leafs and only get 1.5" sag at the wheel wells. & pull 7k lbs and only know it's there when I look in the mirrors.

That's impressive.

Okay, that's good to know. Better factory brake setup is definitely desirable to me.

No big deal. I could fix that if needed.

I can do this work myself, so that doesn't worry me. I'm crazy about maintenance, so I'd probably be doing trans fluid every 30k even if it didn't need to be done. It's fairly cheap preventative maintenance and keeps efficiency at a maximum.

Thanks for the info. I feel quite a bit more informed!

 

Yes, you need an Xcab. With the beast you've built the Ranger will feel like a go-cart. I didn't follow your build past the first page so I'm wondering if it is an auto or an M5OD, too? If it is, then you understand hills and 'sticks'. Go for it. My B4000 now has 206,000+ on it, very dependable little trucks, and you are quite handy.

 

Yeah, I've decided it's a must. The majority of the ones I've seen for sale are extended cab trucks, so no issue there.

Yeah, I pretty much expect it to feel like a go-kart. It'll save me a lot of money, so I can live with it for several days a week. It'll probably pay itself off in fuel savings in about 2 years. Or I'll just drive more...

C6 Auto. 3-speed, no overdrive. I've driven manual, and I feel like that's the only way I like an I4. Better possible MPGs and you can use the torque band better.

Sounds good. Hopefully I'll find a good one for a decent price. I may be waiting until after turkey day and Christmas, but I need one before too long. I'm keeping an eye on what's for sale locally to feel out the market before I rush into anything.

And yeah, I'm pretty handy. Working towards an AutoTech degree currently, so I'm building more skills all the time. I don't mind keeping up on maintenance just so long as it doesn't break down and need fixing frequently. Then it can get annoying even though I can fix it.

Thanks for the reply!

 

In reality look for OHV 4.0 vs the 4 cyl or 3.0. Milage is amost the same and you will have better performance. My 94 weighed in at almost 4000lbs recently and that is a load for what you are thinking. Plus every 4 cyl Ive run across are pretty much crapped out when folks put them up for sale. My 94 has 300000+ on it and still runs strong. The weak link for me has been the trans had it rebuilt a couple of times already. Last major was a water leak which actually turned out to be the water pump manifold to block connection. Other than FWT items it has been very dependable.

 

Not looking for performance. I've got another truck that I've built that'll outrun Mustangs and Camaros, and to do hauling of any real size. Just need MPGs out of a Ranger. With the occasional small hauling duty. If it were going to be my only vehicle, I'd get the 4.0 for it's extra hauling capability and for the fact that it's quicker.

I looked at official rating numbers and see for 1995:
2.3L: 20MPG city, 26MPG highway
3.0: 17 MPG city, 23 MPG highway
4.0: 17 MPG city, 22 MPG highway

The 4.0 is similar in MPG to the 3.0, but both are still a bit off from the 2.3.

Not going to be loaded more than a few hundred pounds in the bed or 500-600 on a trailer often.

I know people who love their 4.0s, and I agree that they're pretty good. I haven't seen many 2.3s that are "crapped out." They don't have a lot of power in the first place, but that's just the nature of the vehicle. I've seen many for sale with under 100k miles and some with as low as about 50k miles for reasonable prices. I'm sure I can get a good one.

 

You've done your homework well, and as you can see, there's a lot of support on this forum. Time to go find the one that says 'this is it'! Now if I could just find a Dakota forum with a tenth of what this one has to offer...

 

Trying to at least.


Yep! I'm going to watch what comes up for sale. I don't mind if I look at a few, and it takes a few months to find "the right one." I plan on keeping it for the long haul, so I want to REALLY like one before I buy it.

Honestly, I feel pretty Ford loyal. Being a part of FTE for almost a year really reinforces my looking at Rangers instead of something like an S10, Dakota, or Ram 50. It's nice to have the support of the forum. I'm mostly on the 1987-1996 (+1997 heavy duties) forum for F-150s and up, and there are tons of users over there. I've gotten a lot of good info and helped a lot of others. Even met a couple members.

 

I bought the Dakota for my wife. Picked it up for $600 and where I live ANYTHING that runs for that price is rare, let alone a 4x4 truck. Besides, that gives me my truck back

 

Sounds good.

You can buy a running vehicle for that around here, but it seems like the cutoff of what's much good is about $1500. Above there you can get a pretty solid old vehicle. Below that, you can get something that needs a lot of hidden work, body is crappy, or has a 300k+ miles. But, sometimes you can get lucky and find a good deal below $1500. The trick can be to find something that someone is really tired of looking at, or something like that. Or if you're mechanically inclined, you can find something for like $400, put $500 or so and some time in it and have a "good enough" vehicle.
Some vehicles just go for really cheap even if they still have life left in them. You can get a pretty decent old Taurus, Focus, Park Avenue, etc... cheap just because there are a ton of them out there. I know someone that bought a 2000 Taurus wagon for $1100 3 years ago, and has been driving it almost daily with minimal maintenance.

 

Hey guys, still been looking at Rangers and considering my options. I've seen some older diesel Rangers around. Some with turbos. Are they worth looking into? I'd imagine there would be no issue pulling well into the 30-40MPG range with one of these. The only issue I'd see is a non turbo possibly being too sluggish. Does anyone know much about these older diesel Rangers?