Looking at newer Rangers

[TexasRebel]

So. In the next 8-10 months, I will probably be on the hunt for a newer truck for my girlfriend. I have been looking at the 92-96 f150s, but now am looking at Rangers also. It would need to be 2wd, preferably ext-cab, and automatic. The better the mpg, the better. Doesn't need to be fast or haul much. I would do upgrades to it as I could. Maybe a small lift or something along those lines. What do y'all think? What would be a good setup to look for? And what would be a good price range to look in? I don't want to spend a whole lot, I'll go to a dealer if I have to even though I'd rather not.

 

[FritzTKatt]

Why lift the 2wd? Do you just want the look of a small increase in stature?

 

[97RangerXLT]

If looking for just a truck to get around in, a 3.0 extended cab Ranger from the late 2000's would be a good bet.

If mileage is a consideration, get the 4 cylinder (and you will sacrifice a lot of power in an extended cab) or you might even revisit the "does she really need a truck" thought and look at some cars instead.

Remember this: if you two get serious and have kids, the Ranger will be a bad choice for a family vehicle. it works good for just one kid/ one adult, but beyond that it is not that great. and the extended cab jump seats I would not put any of my children in them, I do not trust them in a crash. Honestly I would be reluctant to force my wife to ride in them....

AJ

 

[RonD]

1996 and up Ranger will have the newer computer which is good if you want better MPG, but bad if you want to do engine swaps

3.0l or pre-2001 4.0l OHV V6's would be in the extended cabs, the Lima 4cyl was in regular cabs in that time frame, very few in extended cabs, the Duratec 4cyl was offered in extended cabs starting in 2000/1, I think.
Either V6 had MPG is in the high teens, obviously the 4.0l will have less MPG than the 3.0l, laws of physics suck, but they are close to the same

Look on the door sticker for the type of axle it has
Here are the codes: http://www.therangerstation.com/tech_library/axle_codes.shtml

OPEN is a standard axle setup, only 1 wheel gets power
L/S(limited slip) sends power to both wheels, GM calls this Positraction

4.10 gearing is for better torque so good for pulling loads but has high RPMs at highway speeds so MPG goes down
3.45 gearing has lower RPMs at highway speeds but doesn't have low speed torque so isn't great for pulling loads
3.73 gearing isn't great for either but is good at both pulling and highway speed MPG


Good read here on the history of Ranger models and changes: http://www.therangerstation.com/resources/RangerHistory.htm

 

[TexasRebel]

Why lift the 2wd? Do you just want the look of a small increase in stature?

Partially for the looks and partially for the small amounts of mud and sand it would see. I would like another 4wd like my 2nd gen, and I would just get it running for her and let her drive it, but I know the mileage wouldn't be that great and I don't trust its reliability at this time.

If looking for just a truck to get around in, a 3.0 extended cab Ranger from the late 2000's would be a good bet.

If mileage is a consideration, get the 4 cylinder (and you will sacrifice a lot of power in an extended cab) or you might even revisit the "does she really need a truck" thought and look at some cars instead.

Remember this: if you two get serious and have kids, the Ranger will be a bad choice for a family vehicle. it works good for just one kid/ one adult, but beyond that it is not that great. and the extended cab jump seats I would not put any of my children in them, I do not trust them in a crash. Honestly I would be reluctant to force my wife to ride in them....

AJ

I've actually been looking at the 3.0 and its looking like a winner. A small truck like a Ranger would be better for her, so she can still get around in rougher areas that we have around here. And as far as the whole child/backseat thing, I have an 06 Nissan Xterra that is my daily and it is good enough to take a cars place. It has power and still gets 18-21 mpg.

1996 and up Ranger will have the newer computer which is good if you want better MPG, but bad if you want to do engine swaps

3.0l or pre-2001 4.0l OHV V6's would be in the extended cabs, the Lima 4cyl was in regular cabs in that time frame, very few in extended cabs, the Duratec 4cyl was offered in extended cabs starting in 2000/1, I think.
Either V6 had MPG is in the high teens, obviously the 4.0l will have less MPG than the 3.0l, laws of physics suck, but they are close to the same

Look on the door sticker for the type of axle it has
Here are the codes: http://www.therangerstation.com/tech_library/axle_codes.shtml

OPEN is a standard axle setup, only 1 wheel gets power
L/S(limited slip) sends power to both wheels, GM calls this Positraction

4.10 gearing is for better torque so good for pulling loads but has high RPMs at highway speeds so MPG goes down
3.45 gearing has lower RPMs at highway speeds but doesn't have low speed torque so isn't great for pulling loads
3.73 gearing isn't great for either but is good at both pulling and highway speed MPG


Good read here on the history of Ranger models and changes: http://www.therangerstation.com/resources/RangerHistory.htm

I think I've got it narrowed down to the 98-01 area with a 3.0. I know it doesn't have loads of power or go fast, but she doesn't really need something that does have a lot of power or speed.