# Buying a used Ford Ranger? Reliability of motors / tranny?



## AR-Trvlr

I'm planning on replacing my '94 Ranger (200K miles, 4-cyl., 5-speed, standard cab) with something a bit newer. Ideally around 2001 w/ 100k miles, but otherwise similar. I've got some general questions if anyone has any input:

1) Transmission - I prefer manuals, especially with smaller motors. They also seem a bit cheaper over the long run. How bad are the automatics, though? With normal maintenance are they good for 200k? More? Less?

2) Motors - I'm leaning towards another 4-cylinder based on price and gas mileage. Which motors (with normal maintenance) last better? The 4-cylinder, 3.0/v-6, or 4.0/v-6?

3) My goal is to find something for around KBB 'private party' price - is this a pipe dream? Folks seem to be asking significantly more than that around here.....

Thanks!


----------



## contender*

I've owned three with the four cyl 5 speed, one 3.0 with 5 speed and one 4x4 with the 4.0 and the auto.  I pulled a heavy load from Nashville in the 3.0/5 speed and buggered up the final drive gear on monteagle(sp?). Ended up trashing the tranny. The 4.0/auto would pull a load but no matter how nice you drive I couldn't get any better than about 15 MPG, that's almost as bad as my 8.0 liter chevy...   If your just gonna drive the truck and not pull anything or haul any heavy loads the 4 cyl will last longer.


----------



## Doyle

I realize it isn't quite the same, but I had an '86 model 4x4 manual.  That thing ate clutches.   They undersized the clutch and it just couldn't handle the load.   I don't know if the designers fixed that defect or not.


----------



## Jeff Raines

I had a 93 ranger,3.0/manual 5 speed.

3.0 is a great engine,I had over 200,000 miles on mine,never had a problem.
But,mine had the mitsubishi transmission and it was junk.At 50 k miles,replaced throwout bearing (I think),100 k miles transmission went out.Paid aamco 1800 to replace it and within 8 months they had to replace it 5 times.


----------



## chadf

Don't get an automatic
Speaking from experience


----------



## olchevy

well my 1999 ranger had its tranny blow out at 84,000!!!!!! after getting it rebuilt and redone a total of 6 times it seems to be doing great now, the best gas milage is around the 16 -18 mark CRUSING, city is horrible honestly I dont even want to know. But after he installed a shift kit into it, it has been doing great!
Now from all of my research the 3.0 is going to be the most durable of the engines easily lasting to the 300K mark with generall maintance , its just the transsmission that is parred with it, it is the same tranny in the lil 4 cyl engines!, From what i have heard if you get a manual it is just fine and will give great longevity.
I wanted manual, but sadly had to get automatic incase others in my family had to drive it, which they do time to time.

My vote would be the 4.0 manual, then the 3.0 manual, then the 4cyl, unless you never tow anything then jump straight to the 4cyl, I tow A LOT! 
Make it a great truck or not, the choice is yours!

Just to give you an Idea this is what 16-18 mpg highway looks like! *265/75-16*






this is what 10-12mpg looks like, but it can go anywhere!  *36/10.5-15*


----------



## contender*

That was one thing I liked about my 4x4 ranger. The 4x4 system is great considering what you get these days on other vehicles. If not for needing to tow heavy trailers I'd still have it.


----------



## AR-Trvlr

Thanks for the comments.

I'm actually leaning against 4wd because I don't really need it, don't want to pay a premium for it, and don't want the worse gas mileage / more expensive potential repairs.

I also don't tow much - occasionally a 550lb motorcycle on a 5x8 trailer, but that's it.

I'm mostly looking for a standard-cab / 4-cylinder / manual, but was wondering about other options if I found a good price.


----------



## GoldDot40

AR-Trvlr said:


> Thanks for the comments.
> 
> I'm actually leaning against 4wd because I don't really need it, don't want to pay a premium for it, and don't want the worse gas mileage / more expensive potential repairs.
> 
> I also don't tow much - occasionally a 550lb motorcycle on a 5x8 trailer, but that's it.
> 
> I'm mostly looking for a standard-cab / 4-cylinder / manual, but was wondering about other options if I found a good price.



I have a '91 Ranger with the 2.3L 4 cyl & 5 sp manual. It's got close to 300K miles on it and still has the original clutch. I paid $500 for it and all I did was tune it up and replace the starter. I've had it for about 5 years now and it's been a great little truck. I haul a lot more than I probably should with it, but it gets the job done.


----------



## YankeeRedneck

Great thread AR !!!  I"ve been shopping for one also and wondering the same things. Thanks..


----------



## Davis31052

No matter what engine you get, you might want to reconsider the standard cab. There is no room.  You, a passenger, and a couple of jackets in the wintertime and you are packed in there.  I'll never own another regular cab truck unless someone gives it to me. Then you see it posted in the swap and sell.


----------



## redneckcamo

I would go with the original thought ...... 4cyl,5 speed ........ seems that it has done well in the past an maybe you just need one a lil newer !!....good luck !


----------



## Holton

Thin used market now. Deals to be found on new.

I agree with extended cab


----------



## AR-Trvlr

Lizella Fella said:


> No matter what engine you get, you might want to reconsider the standard cab. There is no room.  You, a passenger, and a couple of jackets in the wintertime and you are packed in there.  I'll never own another regular cab truck unless someone gives it to me. Then you see it posted in the swap and sell.



I've been driving a standard cab ranger for the past 2 years, and I'm perfectly happy with it.  It helps that I've got a cap on the bed, so keeping bulky stuff safe/dry isn't an issue.

I'd love a extra cab, but I don't want to pay for it.....  They seem to get a significant premium.


----------



## bearpugh

i'd stay with the 4 cyl manual. best on gas and most reliable. just sold my dads '85. it had 290,000 on it and still doesn't use oil and is reliable. also the v-6's have timing belts to deal with. my wifes explorer has the 4.0 and its a gas hog. around 17-18 mpg.


----------



## NGIB

I bought a 4.0 extended cab with heavy-duty automatic new in 98.  I put over 7 years and 150K on that truck and beat the heck out of it pulling trailers and boats.  Still ran great when I traded it in but little stuff was causing lots of irritation like the temp control breaking (dash needs to come apart) and such.

My brother has been a Ford factory service tech for over 25 years and he says the 4.0 is one of the best engines Ford ever produced.  I replaced it in 05 with a new 4.0 Sport-Trac that I've abused for 87K and it still purrs...


----------



## mikeh25

Ford RWD autos need to have the transmission oil changed every 30K or you will have a problem.


----------

