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

[don4331]

Didn't we go through this with you 3 months ago?

Deciding What Configuration Ranger to Buy

I will be getting my license in December, and I plan on buying a 2004-2011 Ranger for $3000-$4000 this winter/spring. I am looking for one with no more than 200K miles, preferably under 170K. It needs to have a minimum towing capacity of 1,500 lbs. I definitely would prefer a super cab model...

www.therangerstation.com

Funny, the answers are still the same.

 

[Arolsma]

Didn't we go through this with you 3 months ago?

Deciding What Configuration Ranger to Buy

I will be getting my license in December, and I plan on buying a 2004-2011 Ranger for $3000-$4000 this winter/spring. I am looking for one with no more than 200K miles, preferably under 170K. It needs to have a minimum towing capacity of 1,500 lbs. I definitely would prefer a super cab model...

www.therangerstation.com

Funny, the answers are still the same.

No, we didn't. My original question in this thread was if the Ranger was cheaper to maintain compared to other trucks. The conversation drifted to comparing the different engines as it often does. Sorry if my question was not clearly worded, but my intensions were not to compare engines in this thread, just see how readily available parts are for those particular configurations. That other thread had broader questions, and I made a lot of decisions on what I want after that thread. Basically I was second guessing if Rangers are the most reliable/ cheapest to drive midsize truck and was comparing some random repair costs. I explained in this thread why I was looking for a 2.3 auto super cab so the people posting would know what I want out of my truck since not everyone posts on every thread. Thanks for everyone's time. As always, your posts have given me valuable info.

 

[sgtsandman]

It depends on what you are looking at and who you ask as far as the reliability of Ford Rangers in general. Consumer Reports says the truck has an average rating. Neither good, nor bad.

My experience is that they are pretty dependable. Just learn which engines you should avoid. It seems the transmissions have been sorted out with the years are looking at. Consider what you want to do with the truck. If it is going to be for light hauling on occasion and more or less a DD most of the time. Then a four cylinder will probably meet your needs. The four cylinder engines have been perhaps the least problematic of the Ford engines (not to say they didn't have problems from time to time either).

If you live in an area where 4X4 is a necessity, then you are going to be stuck with a V-6. The 3.0 Vulcan is perhaps the most reliable of the engines offered in the Ranger. They are a dog of an engine but will get you from point A to point B pretty much trouble free. If you need to haul, then you'll be better served with the 4.0 SOHC. Just avoid the years known to have issues with the timing chain tensioners.

Regardless, you are looking at a used vehicle and the chances you are going to inherit something the previous owner didn't want to deal with and/or didn't maintain the truck properly.

Also, Fords rust. It's just a fact of life. It can be managed but many don't bother.

Compared to the Hondas I've had in the past and worked on, the Ranger is no better or worse than they are. They all need the same preventive maintenance and things wear out about the same. And Consumer Reports rates the Hondas better. So, it all comes back around to who you ask and what you are looking at. Just make sure you don't set yourself up for failure and not buy enough vehicle to do what you want or you will hate the vehicle.

I did that with the 1998 2.5 Lima regular cab Ford Ranger. There was nothing wrong with the truck. It just didn't meet what I needed. My buddy that has owned it since 2011 or 2012 has been perfectly happy with it.

 

[RonD]

As time passes replacement parts are no longer made by car maker and off the shelf replacements get fewer and fewer

If you buy a 30 year old vehicle then there will be fewer replacement parts than say a 10 year old vehicle
That has nothing to do with Rangers specifically but........................
Last smaller size Ranger was built in 2011, so 10 years old now

Rangers are not very complicated Vehicles but you still NEED replacement parts now and then

 

[Dirtman]

But just because the car maker stops producing parts doesn't mean the aftermarket stops making parts. I can very easily still get parts for my 1965 mustang which is over 55 years old.

Also just because say the ranger ended production in 2011, many parts that fit the ranger also fit on other vehicles. So say you need an IAC valve for a 2011 ranger, that same part may still be used on a 2020 ford something or other and therefore it's still widely produced.

 

[RonD]

I am sure you are going to, or have, run into parts that are hard to find
And Mustangs of that vintage are "collector cars" so yes, rabid collectors will PAY for those hard to find parts, lol, so 3rd partys will make them as long as the market is there
And NOS(new old stock) is often few and far between and worth 2 arms and a leg

Try to find parts for a 1977 AMC Pacer , even 3rd party
I don't want them, just saying a 1965 Mustang is not a 2001 Ranger

Our Rangers won't ever be that type of vehicle and there will be parts that become hard to find

You could probably build a whole VW Beetle from 3rd party parts, lol, but our Rangers will never be that

 

[MikeG]

They're right there on the shelf next to the Pinto stretch limo parts

 

[saxtech]

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

I used to have a '98 2.5 Auto. I was the original owner (for 20 years) and I made it to 405,000 Miles. I never had a major repair other than Brakes, Radiator, Water Pump, Alternator, 1 injector, 1 coil, ect... (original engine, trans, and diff). All expected normal maintenance items. You don't have to take these trucks to dealers for repairs. If you can't troubleshoot your own issues and fix yourself with the wonderful help from this Ranger Forum, then any of your favorite low-cost repair facilities can work on these trucks with no problem and parts are cheap and plentiful and are usually in stock at your neighborhood corner auto-parts store..... FYI in case you are wondering why I no longer have my 98, it finally died with 405,000 miles. It got water in the oil which means a crack somewhere or bad head gasket. With that many miles on her, it would not have been wise to repair the engine for fear of it becoming a money pit since the original trans and differential had just as many miles on her. I figured I got my moneys worth out of her an a ton of wonderful memories over 20 years.... I now have a 2003 3.0 Auto and found her about a year ago with only 43,000 miles on her. I'm a Ranger owner for life even though I do have a 2013 Frontier purchased brand new and a C5 Corvette. The Ranger is the most reliable vehicle I have ever owned in my life (60 years).

 

[tahu2121]

If you go with the 2.3 try to look at 04+ trucks. 2002-2003 2.3's had a stupid intake runner control system that was found to be totally useless and somewhat problematic (the flaps could stick or actually break off and shoot through the engine). It was deleted from 2004 and on.

Funny you mention this! I happened to buy my Ranger last month and it was cheaper than most of the other Rangers. Come to find out it had 2 trouble codes and wouldn't pass smog. It had codes P0302 and P1537 and all I had to do was replace the Intake Manifold Runner Control Valve (IMRC Valve) which I found for $20 on eBay or you could buy at auto parts stores for about $35 and it completely fixed my issues. Helped me get a cheap truck!!! XD

 

[tahu2121]

Funny you mention this! I happened to buy my Ranger last month and it was cheaper than most of the other Rangers. Come to find out it had 2 trouble codes and wouldn't pass smog. It had codes P0302 and P1537 and all I had to do was replace the Intake Manifold Runner Control Valve (IMRC Valve) which I found for $20 on eBay or you could buy at auto parts stores for about $35 and it completely fixed my issues. Helped me get a cheap truck!!! XD

Also ended up passing smog no problem! in California no less!

 

[jomcan]

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 2.3 does not have a timing belt. It has a chain. The chain will last at least 300000 kilometers probably more.