Used to have Ranger. I think I want another. Got questions.

[Anthony]

I'm looking for a fuel efficient truck that will fit my lifestyle.
It needs to fit me, my girlfriend, a 72lb boxer, and a 35lb Beagle/Dachsund mix. It also needs to occasionally pull a small Utility trailer about 500-600lbs, and I am thinking about getting a small camper so I would like to be able to pull 1500-2000lbs a couple time s a year as well. I am a truck driver, so acceleration and power isn't terribly important to me, but I do typically drive about 70-75 most of the time.

I have used many 1st Generation Rangers as work trucks. I also used a newer one I believe it was a 94? I know it had 8spark plugs and MS/MB.
I have owned a 2000 4.0 5speed 4x4 super cab. I also have owned an 1987 2.3 5speed 4x2 single cab, manual everything. The later of the 2 was the best vehicle I have ever owned, a true marvel of engineering. And I also know the engine and the vehicle very well.

I would prefer something that is OBD II. I was thinking perhaps a 96 Ranger XL.
I prefer manual steering and manual brakes. What was the last year for MS/MB? can you get a manual steering truck with AC?
I want vinyl interior with rubber floor and I prefer the metal ceiling. I would think the cheap trucks probably don't have cruise control. Can it be added easily, or is it more hassle than it's worth?
I also want manual windows.
I realize the backseat of a Ranger is worthless, so I want a single cab. I never had a truck with a cap or a camper shell, but I was wondering how well would AC cool off the back if I left the rear slider open? Is this a lost cause?

What year was the last year for a manual transfercase shifter? I also figured I would have to buy a 2wd truck and drive it as is for a while and if it's a worth while truck eventually find a doner truck to make it 4wd. Is there room to put a manual transfercase shifter in a newer truck cleanly?

I am also considering a Bronco II, although I have never driven one. Do Bronco II's come stock with 2.3L engines? and also does anyone make after market windows for the back that open, and does anyone make a tailgate with glass that opens? Something tells me the extra weight of the Bronco II on a 2.3L would make the truck worthless with AC.

My 87 2.3L Ranger got 21.5mpg all the time and had over 300k on the engine. I was hoping to get at least 20mpg out of what ever I get.

I was also considering maybe a 1996 F-150 stepside with a 4.9L and a 5speed. Does anyone know what kind of MPG they get?
Or I was considering a Pinto Station Wagon, but I would want a 2.3L EFI like from my 87 Ranger and I figured I could use a 5 speed from a late 80's 4banger Mustang because of the cable clutch, but I don't really know what's involved with wiring the old car for EFI, but I have converted V-6 Auto Mustang II's to V-8 4speeds, so I am aware of some problems you run into.

I have a Honda Element now which goes 80-85mph and gets 21-24mpg with the AC on, I just miss having a pickup and/or a vehicle that I didn't have to care about as much.
I am wondering if I should stick with what I have or if I what I want is actually duable?

 

[Bryan22]

Ranger 2.3's are great, but to be honest, I'd be looking for a toyota pickup with a 2.2 or a 2.4. I have a 2001 tacoma with a 2.4 that has at least 400 lbs in the bed by the end of the day, everyday, if not more. This truck probably averages 25MPG(as much as 27) and is used to commute everyday as well as drive between houses in town. The motor has tons more power than my ranger, and at 260,000 miles is still going strong with very few problems. I love my ranger, don;t get me wrong, but If i wanted a truck for good mileage, great A/C and the power to tow I would go toyota. my 02 cents.

 

[Jason]

The new tacoma 2.7vvt-i is an amazing truck and you can get an extended cab that isn't useless. My grandfather bought one after he ran my Tacoma for a few weeks. 27mpg mixed and comfy as hell. however it does have pw,pdl,cruise, ac, rearview camera, and a slew of other stuff you don't want like vehicle stability control which makes sliding on snow impossible even when intentional.

 

[BRUTUS_T_HOG]

you want a 96+ extended cab 2.3l 5spd. it will meet all your needs.

i hear the 4.9l's get 20MPG max. i'd love to find an F150 with a 4.9l but they are rare around here.

 

[modelageek]

FYI..........all 1995 + ford Rangers are OBD-II

 

[Anthony]

Ranger 2.3's are great, but to be honest, I'd be looking for a toyota pickup with a 2.2 or a 2.4. I have a 2001 tacoma with a 2.4 that has at least 400 lbs in the bed by the end of the day, everyday, if not more. This truck probably averages 25MPG(as much as 27) and is used to commute everyday as well as drive between houses in town. The motor has tons more power than my ranger, and at 260,000 miles is still going strong with very few problems. I love my ranger, don;t get me wrong, but If i wanted a truck for good mileage, great A/C and the power to tow I would go toyota. my 02 cents.

The reason I want a Ford is because I know them. I had a friend who used to be a Toyota salesman and I have just talked entirely too much crap about them to ever get one no matter how good someone convinced me they are.
AC is not my main concern unless it is cold enough to cool down the interior of a camper shell that I would rather not have, with the back window open. AC is nice, but I prefer a vehicle with out it if I am going to own it. My dogs think otherwise. I only want AC for my dogs sake. My logic is Car payment = AC. That is the only reason I would want it for myself, because I am not going to have a monthly payment and not have AC.

I used to have an 88 F-350, before I had my dogs, and I think with a full sized truck I could leave the windows open and not worry about them jumping out.

The new tacoma 2.7vvt-i is an amazing truck and you can get an extended cab that isn't useless. My grandfather bought one after he ran my Tacoma for a few weeks. 27mpg mixed and comfy as hell. however it does have pw,pdl,cruise, ac, rearview camera, and a slew of other stuff you don't want like vehicle stability control which makes sliding on snow impossible even when intentional.

Not that I would get a Toyota, but most trucks when you start adding features you start getting dumb stuff I have no desire to have like cloth seats and power windows and locks, and carpet a bigger engine. Is that also true with Yotas? My Element isn't terrible, but what annoys me most about the car is the fact that the window sills are too high, and I need to have the key on to put the windows up and down and the towing is only 1500lbs. I really hate power windows. I also dislike strut suspension. It's not meant for offroad at all, and is easily ruined, and expensive to replace. I would much rather have regular suspension with shocks.
Also, I will NOT buy a vehicle with an automatic transmission. If I was going to buy a new truck I would get either an F-150 or a Ram 1500 with a single cab and short bed. Neither are availible with manual transmissions anymore, and I don't want to have a monthly payment.

The best new vehicle I have found that suits me, but I doubt I would ever get would be a GMC Canyon WT. under $21k, single cab, 4x4, manual trans, cruise control, rubber floor, vinyl seat.

you want a 96+ extended cab 2.3l 5spd. it will meet all your needs.

i hear the 4.9l's get 20MPG max. i'd love to find an F150 with a 4.9l but they are rare around here.

My bigger dog would not like the back seat of an exteneded ranger for any long rides, and I like to take him everywhere I can. As far as I know, and I could be wrong, No Ranger 98+ had manual steering. Also I hated the rack and pinion steering on my 2000 Ranger. It was the weak point of the truck in my opinion.

FYI..........all 1995 + ford Rangers are OBD-II

I did not know this. Good to know.

 

[Bryan22]

Well if you're stuck on rangers, and good mileage, go for something 01 + the duratec 2.3 is a great motor with lots more pep than the older LIMA motors. I don't know why anyone would want manual steering or brakes, but i don't think either is an option on the newer trucks, so you're going to have to compromise some of your wants for others. I have a 2.3 and don't get me wrong, I really love my truck! But the older motors just don't get enough MPG for how gutless they are in my opinion. I know you said you don't care about it being a race car or anything, but you'll get much better mileage out of the duratec. Also, no matter what year ranger you pick, stay far far away from any auto equipt ranger.

 

[Anthony]

Well if you're stuck on rangers, and good mileage, go for something 01 + the duratec 2.3 is a great motor with lots more pep than the older LIMA motors. I don't know why anyone would want manual steering or brakes, but i don't think either is an option on the newer trucks, so you're going to have to compromise some of your wants for others. I have a 2.3 and don't get me wrong, I really love my truck! But the older motors just don't get enough MPG for how gutless they are in my opinion. I know you said you don't care about it being a race car or anything, but you'll get much better mileage out of the duratec. Also, no matter what year ranger you pick, stay far far away from any auto equipt ranger.

As much as a love Rangers, I just don't think they would suit my life anymore.
I have another thread going in the Bronco II forum, and I am almost convinced I want a Baby Bronco 2.9L EFI 5speed.

I like manual steering because it is quieter, less stuff to go wrong, and it just seems smoother and more responsive to me, and I like the slower ratios on the gear boxes. And as far as manual brakes I hate dealing with the boosters when they get old and start having issues. I also think the pedal is more consistant and smoother stopping, and I get longer pad/shoe life with manual brakes.

I do not have any kids, but I keep thinking to myself I should have never sold my 87 Ranger... I should have saved it for my son, so the next truck I get I will probably have forever, and I don't want all kinds of fancy shmancy crap to deal with.
I do wish the 87 Ranger was just a little more powerful, and a little more economical than it was, but all in all, for the lack of car payment, the dependability, and cheapness and easyness to fix, and the fact that I could beat the balls off it and drive it as hard as I wanted on any terrain totally made it worth the $550 I paid for the truck, but didn't make it worth the $1200 I sold it for after driving it for 4 years.

Thanks for all the replies though.