I'm in the market for a new vehicle as I'm selling my f-150 (college sucks when it comes to fun). I've been contemplating between FoMoCo or General Motors.

The trucks I've mainly looked @ are the two vehicle lines in the topic, Ranger based and s-10 based, 96' or newer.

I like both trucks , leaning towards the Ranger/Mazda, but havent ruled out the S-10, preferably the ZR-2 model as long as both are 4x4.

The Ranger from what I've seen has had no real differnt models until the splash or the Edge, havent looked that closely.

What I want is an un-biased opinion on BOTH rigs, I know that this is a Ford based site but that doesn't give any reason that somebody can't help a person out in a choice of this nature.

Thanks,
Eric

 

From my previous experince with the various Rangers I used to have, I can say that I would not hesitate getting another one.

There is a good reason why the Ranger has been the best selling compact truck, for umpteen years now.

Dont get down about not haveing a F-150, I'll bet that you'll find the compact truck more fun on the trails.

 

Hey, how you know that's what I'll be doing . The only hesitation I'd have with the S-10 is the IFS, I've heard that they're a pain to lift.

Doesn't the Ranger have the TTB, Dana 44 if I'm not mistaken or is it a Dana 28??

 

I would get the Ranger I did alot of research before I desided to buy a truck and a S-10 was one of my possibilities. Im more of a guy who wants something reliable so I dont crawl under my truck every week. Ive talk to serveral people who owned the ranger,s10, and dakota. The S-10 is better on gas than the ranger but the S10 has a not so wonderful reliability rating in consumer reports and talking to other people. I love my ranger the 4.0 packs a good amount of punch. I wouldnt get the 4 cyl it dont have enough umph and the engine would work too hard if you are hauling something large. I only had one thing go wrong with my Ranger and that was the clutch due to age.

 

It depends on the year you are looking at. The older Rangers did have a TTB front. The '97?? -'98s have a IFS suspension. My '00 4.0L 4x4 5spd that I used to have was an absolutely wonderfull machine off road, and it was a fun truck to have, and it got me through most of college. I really wish I still had it, but I really need the features that my 'Crew offers, especially for car seats for the little ones.

 

They are both good trucks.

I prefer the Ranger because I have had 3 now and have been impressed with their reliability and capability. I still have to chuckle to myself when I see a loaded down 15 year old Ranger work truck sitting at a light next to someones's new full size that doesnt really do anything but drive to the office and back.

As said before, the Ranger is considered to be more reliable, but I've known guys that have had good luck with s10s also.

The 4.3L V-6 in the S10 is a nice engine, usually around 180-190 hp (post TBI) and about 250lbs of torque at a fairly low RPM. The 4.0L SOHC Ford beats it on horsepower, but the Chevy edges it on torque.

But I have to say, that the Colorado sucks compared to the S10, IMHO.

My vote would be for the Ranger though. It's a proven design that for it's category is overall hard to beat.

 

That was my next question, the whole engine thing. The few trucks that I've looked @ have the 3.0 Liter and a 5 spd, but I wasn't sure about them having enough power compaired to the 4.0.

the only rig I've seen thus far w/the 4.0 is a 94' B-2300 which is a strong possibility, I'm going to test drive it tonight, my only thought was that it's got the automatic, with my Jeep it's 4.0 did great with the auto. any opinions there???

 

Yeah the 4.0 is out there in the auto. I think the 4.0 is more common on the club cab rangers or the 4x4 ones. The 4.0 has great power it is a little noisy but its a real strong motor. The 3.0 you a have to wind the motor up to get the power as the 4.0 it has that low end grunt.

 

The Rangers are a pain to find in the 94 production run body style, like I said, all I've found are Mazdas and yes its a club cab, but thats not what I want to know, what I'm wondering is, does the auto hinder the 4.0 to where it dramaticly hurts the performance???

You were saying that the 4.3 is better in low end torque, wouldn't a performance intake and exhaust help to cure that????

 

The difference between auto/manual is about the same as anything else. A good driver with a standard can turn a little better quarter mi time, usually, but the auto is better for towing.

The 4.0L and 4.3L are both good, torquey engines. The intake and exhaust will help mostly at higher RPMs.

The OHV 4.0L made 160 hp and 225 ft lbs, the SOHC makes 207 HP and 238 ft lbs.

 

The Ranger 4.0/ auto is an awesome combo. Pic of my '94 extended cab in my gallery. Most reliable truck I've ever owned and it's got 138K on it now. I put another 200 miles on it today pulling a trailer. Set the cruise at 70 on the interstate and pretended the trailer wasn't behind me.

 

Ranger TTB stopped in 98 when they went to a torsion bar like the 150s. 94 first yr for mazda B-series trucks...

the OHV 4.0 is a good engine with lots of torque. the OHC 4.0 lacks the low end but can haul *** on the top end. early engines had a problem with head gaskets and heads cracking.

the vulcan 3.0 is a good engine, realible but lacks the power to turn bigger tires unless regeared. it does has a pretty nice torque power band.

the 96 and up u can get the splash (till 97), off-road (98-00), edge (00+) and FX (02+) packages.

on the other hand, the s-10 has always been a torsion bar design.

the non vortech 4.3 had a problem with over fueling which leads to washing the oil off the cylinder walls and can cause premature wear. the older body style s-10s were very good trucks, cuz had one and beat the snot outta it and it help up great.

the new vortechs are plently powerful but have there own problems. the intake gaskets leak and the dex-cool coolant likes to eat the alm parts.

the newer s-10s are pretty nice and the zr-2s are good but offer little flex. also u cant lift them as easily due to the different frame...

thats a quick summary of my experiences with those 2 truck lines...

 

Actually, as far as the OHV vs. SOHC, the OHV makes marginally better torque at very low RPMs, but it doesnt take long before the SOHC surpasses it, and keeps pulling up the tach. The SOHC makes almost as much torque as the OHV below 2500 RPM or so, but past that the SOHC develops more torque, peaking at 238 ft lbs at 3000 RPM.

The OHV is a very proven engine, the SOHC's only real fault seems to be the timing chain tensioners, which have supposedly been fixed.

You can't go wrong with either one, really.

 

i have both.

right now im driving a 00 mazda B-3000 and its the best car/truck i have ever had. its the most reliable vehicle i ever had and will go anywhere i ask it to. the 3.0 is low on power, but with the gibson exhaust and intake i put on it it sounds evil and gets up and goes nicely.

I still have my 98 S10. infact my mom just drove it last weekend for the first time in 2 years. it wasnt moving on its own though, I was pulling it with my mazda. the thing has exactly 100k miles on it. the 4 cyl motor is blow (headgasket popped and warpped the head) manual tranny is shot. the slave and master cylinders for the clutch blew out and the synchros are shot. the susppension sags about 2 inches on the drivers side. its on its 3rd replacement fuel pump.... the pumps on the 98+ are $300 each cus they are non-servicable.... umm... oh yeah, and the doors sag on them really bad cus the pin bushing wear out very quickly. mine got bad enough theat it cracked the cab around the strike plate and once the door was fixed i cosed it one day and the door swung back open.... with the strike plate stuck to it.

after that S10, i will never buy another S-truck again. i might buy a silverado some day. but never another S10.

 

I've never owned an S-10, but have had the misfortune of having to drive a couple for 8 hour trips. One was a '01 2wd, 4-banger, it was just plain miserable, the other was a late 90's Ext. Cab 4x4, 4.3. It had adequate power, but it sure didn't feel like it had 30 more HP than my 93 Ranger. I really dislike S-10's. They feel like you're sitting on the floor, they are very cramped, and the suspensions are way to soft and lean way to much on curves. MY 93 Ranger has been very reliable with the exception of the electronic 4x4 shift motor, which is an easy do it yourself fix that is explained very will in the Technical Information thread in the Ranger Forum. As far as the 4.0's go. The OHC has almost identical torque under 2k RPM's and really takes off after about 2500. Stay away from the 3.0. It is ok on a 2wd, but is really overworked on a 4x4. Here is a Dyno of a OHV vs OHC 4.0.