Search results

I am looking at Super Cab, XL-trim, RWD Rangers, and at $495, the FX2 adds real, aesthetic appeal without adding weight or sacrificing (nominal loss) fuel efficiency. Does anyone on the forum own one or have experience with them?

I would only consider a 4×4 Ranger with the manual-transfer case and manual-locking hubs along with a manual transmission and XL trim with manual locks and windows. I have also resided in Pennsylvania for all of my life, and I have considerable experience driving RWD vehicles in the snow...

All three of the examples have clean tire wells, cab corners, and rocker panels; all would and have passed inspection as well. The 2.3 and 4.0 are especially immaculate, and the 3.0 is very clean as well aside from a dent in the passenger-side fender and a small crack in the grille, which is...

I am looking to purchase a Ranger and have chosen not to pursue a Duratec because of the extensive use of plastics in the engine compartment that are more susceptible to warping and degradation from heat and pressure, and I have also noted the inherent difficulty of replacing the valves on the...

Ron, this particular example has a five-speed, manual transmission to which you alluded, a manual-transfer case (floor lever), manual-locking hubs (front wheels), manual-window cranks, a bench seat, and XL trim; it is a rather basic, albeit inexpensive and very fuel-efficient truck. Moreover...

I just purchased a 1996 Ford Ranger XL Regular Cab with a 2.3 I4 mated to a 5-speed, manual transmission and a 4×4 with a manual-transfer case and manual-locking hubs. I know they are exceptionally rare, as I was only able to locate four examples in a search query factoring a 500-mile radius. I...

I just purchased a 1996 Ford Ranger XL Regular Cab with a 2.3 I4 mated to a 5-speed, manual transmission and a 4×4 with a manual-transfer case and manual-locking hubs. I know they are exceptionally rare, as I was only able to locate four examples in a search query factoring a 500-mile radius. I...

Rusty: I have a 2003 F-250 Super Duty (6.8 V10, ZF6 Manual, 4x4, XL Super Cab) as my work truck and primary/daily vehicle; whereas my colleague just purchased a 2018 Silverado 1500 (5.3 V8, Auto, 4x4) with the cylinder-deactivation and auto-start/stop features. I drove his truck to a job site...

I purchased the 1990 Ranger (2.9 V6, 5-speed, 4x4) as a secondary vehicle for local errands and a 1993 F-350 (7.5 V8, 5-speed, 4x4) as a tertiary vehicle principally for plowing my and my father's driveway.

Rusty, the power numbers are thus: 1990 Ford Ranger Regular Cab (2.9 V6): 140 Horsepower, 170 ft/lbs Torque 1996 Ford Ranger Regular Cab (2.3 I4): 112 Horsepower, 135 ft/lbs Torque

Uncle Gump:

Uncle Gump: He employed hood pins because the hood became misaligned after the accident, and it would not catch the latch to close properly.

Uncle Gump: The owner of the 1996 Ranger said during the winter he struck a tree at approximately 35 miles per hour, causing damage to the bumper, grill, and left-frame horn; the bumper and grill were not yet replaced, and he said he used a porta-power to reset the left-frame horn.

Saddle Tramp: *No one has, thus far, commented upon the rarity of the 2.3 I4, 4x4 Ranger whose production ceased after the 1997-model year. **I have a 2003 Ford F-250 Super Duty (Super Cab) with a 6.8 Triton V10 mated to a ZF6-manual transmission and 4x4-drivetrain with a manual-transfer case...

1996 Ford Ranger Regular Cab 2.3 I4 5-Speed, Standard/Manual Transmission 4x4 with Manual-Locking Hubs and Manual-Transfer Case 231,836 Miles $600 Needs Heater Core and Serpentine Belt 1990 Ford Ranger Regular Cab 2.9 V6 5-Speed, Standard/Manual Transmission 4x4 with Manual-Locking Hubs and...