ranger engines reliability

[AgPete139]

Congrats on the truck! 70mi is relatively low! GJ.

How much did you pay again?

 

[robertc1024]

Pics!!!

 

[jhammel85]

Wow, sounds great!

PIIICCCCSSSSSS!

 

[Mike Tonon]

If you get an older Ranger, I would avoid the 2.0l engine. I'm sure it can do the job, but its kind of small.

 

[dniksch]

I have a 93 3.0 with 108,130 and was my uncles truck b4 me and motor and auto trans still powerful and running great. I have had a 1992 I4, 94 and 95 4.0's and beat them senseless and still kept going. Will never buy a GM. My dad does and has nothing but problems and he drives them normal. 04 Wrangler I6 4.0 is a tough lil shit too. should have been bought by FORD not craplser.

 

[Vegasjetta]

I have a 97 2.3 with 237k on it, and I have to admit, it runs better than 90% of the cars I have owned (76 cars since 1993).

 

[jteasl1]

Thanks for all the info everyone. I hadent checked this thread in awhile. I'll post some pics in a few day. Thanks again. Oh, I payed 2000.00 for it and I'm very happy.

 

[ashleyroachclip]

All I can say is 514 K and still on the original engine trans and both differentials, as well as paint

 

[Snafu]

i'v got an 88 ranger with a 2.9 at just under 200k miles from what i heard these have head problems but so far i beat it (new to the manual driving scene) and it does fine although when i replaced the distributor i noticed one point on the cap was corroded too all hell and i think thats causing a bit of a miss...

 

[jteasl1]

All I can say is 514 K and still on the original engine trans and both differentials, as well as paint

Damn, 514k? Thats great. What engine do you have and how old is it?