When is it time to call it quits?

[85_Ranger4x4]

^^Interior stuff, tires, wheels, axles, transmission, transfer case are pretty much interchangeable though correct?

If you stay with a BII of similar year yes. They changed the interiors in '89 when they changed the front clip, you can interchange with varying amounts of work but it is different. They had a bunch of different manual transmissions so it would be dumb luck of you landed on one with the same as yours. BW1350 was standard for all the BII's.

Rangers are pretty much the same, the rearward interior trim would obviously be different. The rear axle is also different, the BII has the diff more centered because it didn't have to dodge the fuel tank. If you get a new enough Ranger to get a 4.0 the front axle will be different as well (same if you get into the mutant D28/D35 hybrids with the 2.3/3.0 trucks) Same story about trying to get the same trans as what you have, they had a bunch of them going until the M5OD came out in '90.

 

[wildbill23c]

If you stay with a BII of similar year yes. They changed the interiors in '89 when they changed the front clip, you can interchange with varying amounts of work but it is different. They had a bunch of different manual transmissions so it would be dumb luck of you landed on one with the same as yours. BW1350 was standard for all the BII's.

Rangers are pretty much the same, the rearward interior trim would obviously be different. The rear axle is also different, the BII has the diff more centered because it didn't have to dodge the fuel tank. If you get a new enough Ranger to get a 4.0 the front axle will be different as well (same if you get into the mutant D28/D35 hybrids with the 2.3/3.0 trucks) Same story about trying to get the same trans as what you have, they had a bunch of them going until the M5OD came out in '90.

I'm going to be sticking with the 80's trucks, never cared for the 4.0 engines and when they went to that automatic overdrive that ended it for me right there after 2 transmissions in a year in my grandfather's 93 ranger they can keep them, not to mention I didn't care for the body looks on the newer rangers, I liked the older box styling.

If I get another Ranger or B2, I'm tossing around the idea of an automatic, then keep finding they are pretty much A4LD's unless I get into another 84 and possibly 85.

So there's really no reason to keep the B2 at all since major components won't interchange into the newer models anyhow LOL. Damn you Ford LOL.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

A4LD came out in '85... and is the same length as an M5OD if you find one with a dead trans for cheap and are up for a trans swap.

83-84 you could get a C3 (what the A4LD grew out of) and the C5 which was a fancy C4. If you do much hwy driving I would avoid a non-od trans.

 

[ZMan]

The last ranger I daily drove, I sold because I was putting about ~100 a month in parts into it to keep it running, decided to get a newer "nicer" vehicle, that ended up backfiring on me because I put an engine and a transmission in it before I had it paid off, when the "new" engine started showing signs of wear is when I decided to off it.

Currently trying to sell my girlfriends '03 Accord because her replacement transmission now has more miles on it than the original did when it went, and I don't want to wait around and find out if this ones going to go out.

I'd say if the B2 is mechanically sound and you can live with the rust, then keep it for a while while you save up for something else. Being a painter by trade, fixing rust on a vehicle really isn't worth it unless you plan on making it a summer only car after you fix it, because "fixing" it never stops it, and you'll just watch your money go down the drain when you see it start bubbling again.

 

[wildbill23c]

A4LD came out in '85... and is the same length as an M5OD if you find one with a dead trans for cheap and are up for a trans swap.

83-84 you could get a C3 (what the A4LD grew out of) and the C5 which was a fancy C4. If you do much hwy driving I would avoid a non-od trans.

Hmm, thanks. Couldn't remember what year that A4LD came out, just after the dealings with grandpa's 93 Ranger I don't really care much for it at all. Is it worth the chance if I can pick one up that's an auto in a newer Ranger or B2? I'm trying to stick with the 80's models, or prior to when they went to that new curved front end style like the 93's had.

The last ranger I daily drove, I sold because I was putting about ~100 a month in parts into it to keep it running, decided to get a newer "nicer" vehicle, that ended up backfiring on me because I put an engine and a transmission in it before I had it paid off, when the "new" engine started showing signs of wear is when I decided to off it.

Currently trying to sell my girlfriends '03 Accord because her replacement transmission now has more miles on it than the original did when it went, and I don't want to wait around and find out if this ones going to go out. I don't mind the manual transmission, just gets kind of old shifting gears all the time around town LOL. Although with the B2 the Manual has saved me a few times and at least got me back home by being able to push start it or get it rolling down a hill and let out the clutch when I had starter issues. Can't do that with an automatic. I'm not sure what my 84 Ranger had for an automatic, all I know is it pulled a travel trailer all over the country for many years and never had a transmission problem.

I'd say if the B2 is mechanically sound and you can live with the rust, then keep it for a while while you save up for something else. Being a painter by trade, fixing rust on a vehicle really isn't worth it unless you plan on making it a summer only car after you fix it, because "fixing" it never stops it, and you'll just watch your money go down the drain when you see it start bubbling again.

This is what I'm worried about, when is it going to just fail on me. I don't really go to far with it because I'm not really sure how reliable it actually is. I mean I'll drive it to like Boise or Ontario but that's not bad if it dies, at least I could get someone to bring me my other truck with my car trailer so I can at least get back home the same day.

I'm kind of leaning more towards a 4WD ranger now, miss having a little run around the hills truck. Not much room to throw gear in the back of a bronco 2 LOL.

 

[90longbed]

same here.... I like the 83-92 rangers more than the 93+.....I like the stripped down models.... in fact both rangers I have owned were both S model truck.....not much to have issues with, 4 cyl 5 speed, power brakes and everything else in manual.... my 88 was a short bed and my 90 is a longbed(duh, like you couldnt tell by my username..lol)

 

[wildbill23c]

I really don't mind the stripped down models at all, just would prefer a 4WD model as I never really know what I may be doing from year to year. I just really enjoy driving the 80's model Rangers for some reason. I've never found a compact pickup I like to drive more than a Ranger, and now the Bronco 2 as well. Just seem that probably better off with a Ranger for hauling/towing practicality for firewood season...have to cut firewood this year no matter what...the boss at work may not like it but I'm going to have to cut wood this year, I don't see them paying the power and gas bill if I don't have firewood.

 

[90longbed]

yeah I hear ya on the 4wd..... would have driven my k5 blazer in the snow storm we just had, but the tags were expired and no insurance on it due to tight finances ....was snowed in till the roads were good enough to drive the ranger.... its the only drivable rig at my place.... the other being a 2001 saturn with timing chain issues.... gotta love the GM eco-tech engines..lol

 

[wildbill23c]

yeah I hear ya on the 4wd..... would have driven my k5 blazer in the snow storm we just had, but the tags were expired and no insurance on it due to tight finances ....was snowed in till the roads were good enough to drive the ranger.... its the only drivable rig at my place.... the other being a 2001 saturn with timing chain issues.... gotta love the GM eco-tech engines..lol

Yep, I don't use the 4WD often but its sure nice to have. When I was up camping often I used the 4WD quite a bit, but haven't been able to go for about 3 years now, but this year was a great snow year so the 4WD in my B2 has been used a few times. I liked the K5 Blazers. Drove the military CUCV blazer around for work for many years, got laughed at because it didn't have AC, or power windows, or power locks, etc. Just the old 6.2L Diesel and 4WD, that's all I needed. Of course the military did away with them and their bright idea of a replacement was brand new 2010 Ford F-150's in 2WD configuration, with absolutely no suspension to handle any sort of loads. We took the CUCV's down for range maintenance on our tank and bradley gunnery ranges, we were in mud, snow, ice, sand, etc. Never had an issue with getting stuck. Ok....fastforward to the stupid idea of the 2WD F-150's. Their fix for the lack of 4WD was to purchase a $400,000 all terrain forklift to pick the trucks up out of where they get stuck. Only the government would think of this.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Hmm, thanks. Couldn't remember what year that A4LD came out, just after the dealings with grandpa's 93 Ranger I don't really care much for it at all. Is it worth the chance if I can pick one up that's an auto in a newer Ranger or B2? I'm trying to stick with the 80's models, or prior to when they went to that new curved front end style like the 93's had.

The 89-92's have a different front end but are still very bricklike.

I don't think they really changed the A4LD much until the 4.0 came out in '90, even then it could be argued very well it wasn't quite enough.

 

[wildbill23c]

The 89-92's have a different front end but are still very bricklike.

I don't think they really changed the A4LD much until the 4.0 came out in '90, even then it could be argued very well it wasn't quite enough.

Thanks, I just remember grandpa's 93 Ranger was just ugly to me in the front end. The more aerodynamic they tried to make them the uglier they got I think and they still didn't get any fuel economy LOL.

Were the earlier A4LD's better since the engine sizes were smaller, like the Rangers I'm looking at are the 2.9L engines and 4x4. I was under the impression the issues in the A4LD started after it was put into the trucks with the 4.0L's.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Were the earlier A4LD's better since the engine sizes were smaller, like the Rangers I'm looking at are the 2.9L engines and 4x4. I was under the impression the issues in the A4LD started after it was put into the trucks with the 4.0L's.

They never were really great. My dying 2.8 killed one, some get along great with them though.

30 years after the fact it is hard to say, that is a lot of wear and tear and they are a long ways from their intended lifespan. Might treat you great or it might blow up in your face.

 

[wildbill23c]

They never were really great. My dying 2.8 killed one, some get along great with them though.

30 years after the fact it is hard to say, that is a lot of wear and tear and they are a long ways from their intended lifespan. Might treat you great or it might blow up in your face.

That's what I'm afraid of. Maybe I'd be better off sticking with the manual transmission a lot less likely to have a major transmission failure with one of them more or less a clutch and related parts failure.

Will see how this year goes as to what I end up doing. Only way I can afford to get something else is by saving my tips from work which isn't that good, but gives me something to look forward to. Been finding older rangers in the $1k-1.5k range here lately.