best ranger years to buy from 1993 to 2000?

[roadster]

Wanted to see what peoples opinion was on the best years of the ranger...least trouble from these years...best year model to own...

 

[FritzTKatt]

Never had a problem with my 94's. Just the regular maintenance and breakage of 15-20 year old parts.

 

[RangerSVT]

93-94 were the odd-ball years. The 4.0 ohv heads were weaker and prone to cracking. 95 heads were redesigned and much stronger, as well as the trucks getting the new style dash, as well as switching over to a standardized OBD2 computer system. 4.0 sohc engines from their development in 96 through 01 had their own startup of issues, mainly only being the chain tensioners, but still a good motor. All the 3.0 Vulcan motors are pretty reliable of all years, but are not known for power(they are a dog). All 2.3/2.5 motors are dead reliable, but again, are for economy only. My personal choice, would be anything newer than 96. In 97, creature comforts started appearing more and more in these trucks (pw & pdl) as well as other features like bucket seats and so on. 98 started getting extended cab doors that open, which were called 3 and 4 door trucks. Also in 98, 4wd models had a new front suspension design, made for a better ride, but gave you more moving parts and more expensive lift kits. Depending on your needs and wants, will determine which year to buy. 93-94 I would stay away from, only cause those are the oddball years with unique wiring harnesses and they are getting old and harder to find in the junkyards for parts. Plus for the same price you can get a 95 with newer looks and amneties...


SVT

 

[97RangerXLT]

my 97 is great.

In addition to the points that Ranger SVT made, 95+ had a brake system upgrade. These models had a dual piston caliper for the front brakes, and did away with the pin system that held the calipers on.

If you are getting 4wd, I would go 96 or 97. you are getting the modern obd2 diagnostic system, the upgraded brakes, the new style interior, and 97 was the last year for the TTB setup. the 98 had a vacuum system to lock in the hubs which had its own troubles, plus it is much more complicated to lift as mentioned above.

AJ

 

[oksleeper]

My 98 never gave me trouble, most reliable vehicle ive owned. Wish i still had it but had to sell her when my wife lost her job

 

[EMB1230]

The SOHC "Lima" four's are indeed great motors but 89 + ones have 2 spark plugs/cylinder and they (all the way back to '74) use a timing belt that has to be replaced every so often. On the plus side, they're non-interference engines so a belt breaking will NOT cause valves and pistons to collide with each other. The Duratec four is also very relaible and has 4 plugs and a timing chain.

95 or 96 and newer 3.0's had problems with the camshaft position sensor & synchronizer shaft. This shaft also controls the oil pump. Despite what people say 3.0's make decent (not great) power for their size, but their HP/TQ peak is way too high for a truck, however they do only get 1-2 MPG more than a 4.0L.

 

[FritzTKatt]

Can you swap the 95+ knuckle out onto a 94 axle?

I'd love to trash the pin setup and have dual piston calipers.

 

[Andy D]

The Rat is a '94. A key factor in its purchase is that it isnt OBDII . Mass doesnt smog test OBDI . Non of my old heaps have OBDII

Slowly but surely I'm getting the lowdown on 4.0 heads cracking. I can but hope. Typical Ford

I havent had the Rat long enough to have much old Ford trroubles . It has a good PS pump, but a leaky box that reminds me every time I have to help the wheel back to straight when it is cold. The Rat came with some seals in a baggy that MAY fix that. Truck goes fine but I just drive it on weekends. Maybe I should start driving it to church.

 

[4x4junkie]

93-94 were the odd-ball years. The 4.0 ohv heads were weaker and prone to cracking. 95 heads were redesigned and much stronger, as well as the trucks getting the new style dash, as well as switching over to a standardized OBD2 computer system. 4.0 sohc engines from their development in 96 through 01 had their own startup of issues, mainly only being the chain tensioners, but still a good motor. All the 3.0 Vulcan motors are pretty reliable of all years, but are not known for power(they are a dog). All 2.3/2.5 motors are dead reliable, but again, are for economy only. My personal choice, would be anything newer than 96. In 97, creature comforts started appearing more and more in these trucks (pw & pdl) as well as other features like bucket seats and so on. 98 started getting extended cab doors that open, which were called 3 and 4 door trucks. Also in 98, 4wd models had a new front suspension design, made for a better ride, but gave you more moving parts and more expensive lift kits. Depending on your needs and wants, will determine which year to buy. 93-94 I would stay away from, only cause those are the oddball years with unique wiring harnesses and they are getting old and harder to find in the junkyards for parts. Plus for the same price you can get a 95 with newer looks and amneties...


SVT

I have to disagree on a number of points here...

I don't know where you got they're "odd-balls", but '93 & '94 were probably the most reliable years ever in their day. For one thing they don't have the sticky door pins that cause the dome light to stay on and the dinger on some years to blare away incessantly while you're trying to drive ('95 for sure, possibly '96 & '97 too). They also don't have windshield wipers with a "phantom" mode. As for the wiring, I'm not sure how common it is to have issues with wiring unless it's been butchered up at some point... The vast majority of parts (interior and chassis/drivetrain) are common from '90-'94.
I also have not heard that many reports of 4.0L heads cracking as you say (certainly not like I have 2.9L heads). I do know the newer heads are better for performance however.

Also FWIW, the SOHC motors weren't used in Rangers until '01, though the chain tensioner issues still hadn't been resolved until even a few years after that ('04 I think). From what I know about it, it's more of a noise issue than anything ('97 was 1st year for the SOHC in Explorers).



To the OP,
As for what year to buy, it really depends on what you want from it.
If you're looking for a 2WD, I say buy as late as you can find/afford. All of them are pretty good.

If you want a 4WD to modify into a trail rig, '93-'97 with the Twin-Beam front suspension is what you want (much more rugged, and easier/cheaper to lift/modify).
If you just want a foul-weather driver (4WD) that you don't plan to modify the suspension on, I would again say buy as new as you can find/afford (but try to avoid the '98-'00 models with the PVH auto hubs).

Can you swap the 95+ knuckle out onto a 94 axle?

I'd love to trash the pin setup and have dual piston calipers.

Yes, you can put the '95-'97 axle ends (knuckles/spindles/brakes) onto the earlier trucks w/D35 axle.

 

[roadster]

some great feed back on the trucks and different pros and cons

 

[DRanger024]

4.0 SOHC timing chain tensioner issue was mostly resolved in late '02 with an updated tensioner which I think may have been updated again in '04. But that motor is out of the requested range anyways.

I had a '94 2.3 reg. cab 2wd that was perfect right up until I sold it at 254,XXX miles as the second owner. I had oil change and tire replacement receipts from the PO who supposedly saved every maintenance receipt (by cramming the glove box full of them). I would stick to the gen 3 range (93-97) for the best, cheapest maintenance trucks. Gen 4's are great trucks but the maintenance can be pricey in a lot of situations.