In general, how easy/inexpensive are Rangers to work on?

[Arolsma]

I have been in the market for a Ranger for a while now, and I am wondering how easy they are to work on. I am mainly looking for a 2007-2011 2.3 auto, but am also considering ones that are 3.0 manual from 03, 07, & 08 and 4.0 auto or manual from 03-11. I am looking for a rwd. I looked up the costs of some repairs/parts on Rangers, Colorados, Frontiers, and Dakotas. From what I found, repairs such as axle replacement, steering pump replacement, alternator replacement, etc were the least expensive on Rangers. For example, an alternator for a 2.3 Ranger from Advanced Auto Parts is $160 while one for a Frontier is $255. Are Rangers, the 2.3 duratec in particular, known for being easy and inexpensive to work on? I want low ownership costs and a truck that will easily make it to 225K miles. Thanks for your time

 

[rubydist]

If you want to work on it yourself, I would suggest the 2003. That was the last year of the mechanical odometer, which in itself is not important, but what it means is after that with the digital instrument cluster - the cluster and the pcm each record the mileage and have to agree before they will let the engine start. So, if the cluster or pcm goes bad on the 2003, you can get a junkyard part and just replace it, whereas on the 2004+ you would have to pay someone to reprogram the cluster or pcm to the right miles/vin/etc. (And many of the dealers will insist that you have to buy a new/refurb pcm rather than re-write a used one, even though that is not true.) And from 2006+ they started with CANBUS which makes it even harder to just swap parts around since many of the electronic parts talk to each other on the bus and can tilt if you replace one of the pieces. All that electronic complexity, while it provides some neat technical functions, makes reliability worse.

The difficulty with this plan is that the early 2000s Rangers in this part of the world are nearly the same price as the 9/10/11 ones but tend to have way more miles on them and also way more paint issues.

Just my $.02 for what its worth.

 

[Dirtman]

While in theory I don't disagree with @rubydist's general thoughts on the digital cluster and can bus systems. It's essentially a non existent problem. They simply don't go bad that often and usually outlive the truck. Everything has can bus systems and pcm coded guages these days, its literaly mandatory.

I can't answer on the other engines (they are all good engines with some quirks) but I own a duratec so I have first hand knowledge. They are very reliable engines and most routine maintenance is easy and dirt cheap. The exception being the PCV valve which itself isn't expensive but it's a pain in the butt to replace since you need to take the tire and inner fender off. There are other parts that are annoying to work on but thankfully they just don't need maintenance that often if ever.

Parts are cheap though since its an extremely common and widely used engine, it's still used now in the new rangers just in a turbocharged form so it has over 20 years in production. Engines that can't last 200k+ don't usually stay in production that long. That and most of the parts you mentioned like the alternator and power steering pump are also not really known for failure and can also last 200k.

The automatic transmissions need to be kept cool, as in more cool than the stock system allows so add a auxiliary cooler and before you buy one inspect the fluid carefully for color and burnt smells. The manuals are pretty much bullet proof.

All of the suspension and brake parts are common types and easy to work on. Nothing unique about them.

Overall rangers from that era are extremely reliable and easy/cheap to work on. They are cheap to work on even in major repairs in the case of (god forbid) an accident because they are so common that there is no shortage of used parts.

 

[DILLARD000]

My 2001 SportTrac, roughly equivalent to 2001 Ranger, owed since 2002@10kMiles, now 240kMiles,
original V6~4.0L~SOHC Engine + original 5r55e 5SpeedAuto Tranny + original 1354 4x4TransferCase.
Roughly $100/yr Tags+Tax, $400/yr LiabilityOnlyInsurance, $400/yr Maintenance; some years more\less.
Averages 16.5~18mpg & 11400 Miles/Year x $2.50/GallonUnleaded = $1700/yr $140/mth Fuel costs.
I have my own garage+tools & do my own maintenance; quadruple the maintenance costs if you don't.
I expect to need a $2000 Tranny rebuild in the next year or two; 4r~5r series trannies have known issues.
Ditto on the Pre-HEC 2003+Earlier InstrumentCluster+PCM; an advantage but trade off on older models.
If looking today, I'd be attracted to 2010~2011 SportTrac with a V8, or an F150\250.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I would go 2.3 for a standard cab and a 3.0 for an extended cab.

3.0 wouldn't be horrible for a standard cab either but they don't bring a ton more power than the duratech and drink more fuel. But with the extended cab a little extra umph won't hurt.

Drive as many as you can and see what you think. Between the two I don't think there is a wrong option

2.3 does have a timing belt, the 3.0 does not. It is a non-interferance engine and I don't think it is supposed to be too bad to replace.

Check under the truck CLOSELY for rust, floor pans, cab corners, frame, bed structure and everything sheetmetal you can look at. That is where repairs become a major PITA. Frames on the newer ones go away fast.

As far as I am concerned Can-bus is the answer to a question nobody asked but it is hard to avoid these days.

 

[bobbywalter]

I would go 2.3 for a standard cab and a 3.0 for an extended cab.

3.0 wouldn't be horrible for a standard cab either but they don't bring a ton more power than the duratech and drink more fuel. But with the extended cab a little extra umph won't hurt.

Drive as many as you can and see what you think. Between the two I don't think there is a wrong option

2.3 does have a timing belt, the 3.0 does not. It is a non-interferance engine and I don't think it is supposed to be too bad to replace.

Check under the truck CLOSELY for rust, floor pans, cab corners, frame, bed structure and everything sheetmetal you can look at. That is where repairs become a major PITA. Frames on the newer ones go away fast.

As far as I am concerned Can-bus is the answer to a question nobody asked but it is hard to avoid these days.

Those are older options

 

[Arolsma]

Drive as many as you can and see what you think.

That is my biggest concern right now. I haven't ever driven a Ranger lol. All the ones I have been interested in have had various issues (mainly rust and the lack of cruise control which I want) or uncooperative sellers, so I haven't gotten as far as a test drive yet. There is an older retired guy I know who has a Ranger Edge (not sure of engine or year) that I might see if I could take for a quick spin.

 

[Dirtman]

I would go 2.3 for a standard cab and a 3.0 for an extended cab.

3.0 wouldn't be horrible for a standard cab either but they don't bring a ton more power than the duratech and drink more fuel. But with the extended cab a little extra umph won't hurt.

Drive as many as you can and see what you think. Between the two I don't think there is a wrong option

2.3 does have a timing belt, the 3.0 does not. It is a non-interferance engine and I don't think it is supposed to be too bad to replace.

Check under the truck CLOSELY for rust, floor pans, cab corners, frame, bed structure and everything sheetmetal you can look at. That is where repairs become a major PITA. Frames on the newer ones go away fast.

As far as I am concerned Can-bus is the answer to a question nobody asked but it is hard to avoid these days.

2002 and up 2.3 has a timing chain not a belt and is very much an interference engine. The 2.3 also makes slightly more power than the 3.0 which is why it was dropped as an engine option. (There was no point having a less powerful v6 that used more gas than the 4 cylinder).

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

2002 and up 2.3 has a timing chain not a belt and is very much an interference engine. The 2.3 also makes slightly more power than the 3.0 which is why it was dropped as an engine option. (There was no point having a less powerful v6 that used more gas than the 4 cylinder).

Hm, I thought they were still belt.

 

[Arolsma]

I mainly am looking for a 2.3 from 07-11 because I want a super cab and good gas mileage. I expect our economy will go kaput soon, and I want to be able to afford to drive.

 

[DILLARD000]

If any Seller refuses to let you test drive, or closely inspect, or have your mechanic inspect, or do an OBD2 scan,
immediately walk away!

 

[Orca]

If any Seller refuses to let you test drive, or closely inspect, or have your mechanic inspect, or do an OBD2 scan, immediately walk away!

+1

If I were shopping for any used Ford, I'd want to connect to any/all prospective vehicles to have FORScan check for DTCs (Diagnostic Trouble Codes) on all modules before buying that vehicle. Sorry if that's not totally on-topic, but it's food for thought.

Whatever you decide to do or buy, good luck!

 

[09fx4guy]

I look around a car with a fine tooth comb when I am looking at buying it, especially from a dealer. I bring my scanner with me. Any reputable dealer should let you test drive a vehicle. It's not like you want to test drive a Shelby Mustang or something wildly expensive on a whim, you came there to see that particular truck.

However, I could see a private seller not wanting you to go for a test drive unless you were a serious buyer. There are plenty of people out there that I would not trust to drive my truck, because god forbid an accident, they would probably take no responsibility. I wouldn't hesitate to let them ride in the truck on the way to their mechanic for an inspection.

Personally I find these trucks easy to work on. Fluid changes are pretty simple. Most parts on the truck that could require replacement are readily available, and there is still somewhat decent aftermarket support. There may be some jobs that are a little more difficult, but that is with any car. Most of the systems on the later Rangers (07-11) were being used for about 10 years, so they pretty much had all of the major kinks worked out. The only issue I know that is now popping up is the airbags having to be recalled.

 

[MikeG]

Stick with a 4-banger and I think you'll be fine. The 4.0 overhead cams have their quirks and maintenance issues.

Auto trans should last between 200k and 300k miles, if it has been taken care of. It's a common trans so any decent shop ought to be able to rebuild when the time comes. With the 4 cyl, they might go longer than that. I got nearly 300k out of the trans on mine, behind a 4.0 OHV v6.

Rest of the suspension and drive train is about stone-age simple, compared to a lot of expensive cars on the road. U-joints, tie rod ends, control arms, shocks, and whatnot. Leaf springs rarely wear out and torsion bars can at least be adjusted a little.

Have someone take you for a ride in their truck. Not driving, you can pay more attention to the sounds and feel. Someone who keeps records, I'd buy from them before someone who did not. Listen for clunks, squeals, and grinding noises.

 

[stmitch]

Duratec/extended cab trucks are super rare, and I think they're all automatics. You don't want a Duratec with an Auto trans if you've got a choice. They came with different rear gears that kill fuel economy. The auto trans is less reliable than the manual too.
A duratec/manual combo in a regular cab can tickle 30mpg. A duratec/auto trans combo is usually stuck in the 23-25mpg range. Add a few hundred extra lbs for an extended cab, and you've got a 4cyl truck that gets fuel economy in the low 20s.

The 3.0 is a boat anchor, and it's thirsty. But they are hard to kill and parts are cheap. If you want an extended cab truck, they're far more common than the 4 cylinders.

Both engines are pretty reliable and cheap to maintain. Both engines were used in multiple vehicles for many years so parts are easy to find. I've owned both and would probably choose the Duratec if all else is the same, but you can't always get exactly what you want