Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Site Notices
6/21/2017 8:25:40 PM
Posted: 6/4/2001 8:53:05 PM EDT
I'm thinking of buying a used '99 or '00 Ford Ranger 2WD extended cab. I have some questions: 1) I know I want a V6, question is 3.0L or 4.0L? I heard the 3.0L flex fuel engine is loud and unpopular - is this true? 2) Stick shift or automatic? I like stick shift but is auto better some how? 3) Having driven imports all my life, this is venturing to the "dark side" for me. I don't expect Ford to be as reliable as the Japanese cars, but will I live to regret this decision?
Link Posted: 6/4/2001 9:03:48 PM EDT
They are a great value compared to their Japanese competition and Consumer Reports gives them high marks. I like the idea of the flex fuel system, but would choose the 4.0 liter myself. My friend has a 1998 4.0 L 4X4 Ford Ranger and loves it.
Link Posted: 6/4/2001 9:07:59 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/4/2001 9:06:23 PM EDT by NODDAH]
I bought a 1990 Ranger new when I was in the Army. I put 140,000 miles on it and sold it in 1999. My opinion is if you go 3.0 get the stick. The stick has less hp loss to the ground than the auto. If you go with the 4.0 you can forego the stick & go auto. My Ranger was a reliable vehicle for me and I was very rough to it. Though I did do all the necessary maintenance. This is interesting : 75% of the Ranger chasis and engine, suspension are in common with the explorer. So you always no where to get parts.
Link Posted: 6/4/2001 9:12:14 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/4/2001 9:15:50 PM EDT by uglygun]
2 things I hate about Ford Rangers, 1.) THEY EAT BRAKES! The things were designed for fleet use where they came equiped with dinky little 14 inch rims, that limits the size of the disc brake rotor they can stick under there and if you're hard on brakes you'll really feel it with the Ranger. My major bitch is that through 3 redesigns now they have yet to just say "screw the 14 inch wheel" and put a 15 on there standard while upping the rotor size as well, besides how many freaking offroad tires can you find for a 14 inch wheel? The answer to that is like 2 or 3. 2.) Ford wiring and electronics seems to SUCK. I've had two Rangers and they both went buggy doing things like having the windshield wipers turn on unexpectedly and just continue to go until you shut your vehicle off and restart, I have no windshield wiper fluid in my truck as it's happened so much it drained the tank. I've also had bizarre throttle response that I think is primarily the fault of the engine management computer sytem. On a whole it's not all that bad but just annoying. 1 thing I can recommend with the Ranger Definitely get the 4.0, it is more of a torque engine where it develops it's power down low around 1800-2k RPM while the 3.0 puts it's peak torque up about 500-600RPMs higher than what the 4.0 puts it out at. Also, the 4.0 comes in two flavors and I'm not sure if the overhead cam motor is in the Ranger yet or not but the difference between both of the inblock cam V6s will net about 185ft/lbs for the 3.0 and about 220ft/lbs for the 4.0. More torque is better, by all means go for it. Want to conserve gas? Stick it in overdrive and cruise at 75mph doing 2.2k rpm. With regards to the stick versus the automatic, all I've ever had is the 5 speed. With a 4.0 I'm not sure if you can even get it with a 5 speed still. I'm a bit hard on the 5spd so my tranmission is likely going to let loose around 85k miles, that's where my last truck dropped it's transmission and I expect something similar from this one. I had a friend with his 2.3 Ranger and an automatic drop a couple transmissions, he was rough as HELL on the thing though and I wouldn't expect any normal person to have much trouble with the automatic. I also love the extended cabs. Great for throwing your guns in the back when you head out shooting, ammo in the truck bed and guns in the back of the cab. It's also better for taller people as you don't feel like you're sealed in a sardine can death trap, I think visibility is better too. Old truck was a 91 four banger and I grew to have the biggest engine envy of my entire life with that truck, no guts was it's running theme for the entire time I owned it. New truck is a 95 3.0 V6. My dad's got a 99 3.0, it's that fuel system you mentioned and I do notice it's a bit noisier but not too bad. Thing that drove me nuts is that in my dad's truck they dropped the option of a tachometer, seemed kinda dumb but ohwell. You don't need it for shifting but the console looks naked without it and it's nice to look down and see what your running at when you're cruising. With the 4.0, if you ever choose to do so, there are quite a few engine mods out there to help you really gain some power with the things. :)
Link Posted: 6/4/2001 9:23:58 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/4/2001 9:33:00 PM EDT by doggie]
I'm a technician at a Ford dealer and I think the 3.0L is a very reliable engine but like NODDAH said it is a little underpowered for a truck, however it would be o.k. with the manual transmission combined with your choice of 2WD. If you choose 4x4 or automatic transmission, the 4.0L is a must. The best thing to determine which power combo is best for you would be to go out and test drive Rangers with each engine/tranny combo. Alot of techs bought Rangers in 99 and 2000 when the dealer had a special on buying and leasing and they seemed to be reliable and no one had any real trouble. I don't know about where you are from, but here anyway now would be a good time to look for a Ranger with all the lease returns coming in the dealer's lots will be full of them and this should bring the price down some. Hope this helps some and good luck. In response to uglygun, 99 and 2000 should both have the 15 inch wheels. The brakes went out often on the 95 and earlier models, but 96 and newer have different brake components and the pads themselves are about twice as thick as the ones found on 95 and prior. Finally, I can say the uncommanded wiper function was very common, but there is an updated multifunction switch which will cure this problem and on some vehicles, this is a recall so check with your dealer.
Link Posted: 6/4/2001 9:32:56 PM EDT
Its hard to beat the deals that Ford is offering on Rangers right now. I have had 2 Rangers, both 4x4s, The first I got hit in but walked away unhurt, The second is the 4x4 supercap,loaded, Auto, 4.0 with 3.73 limited slip (more than enough power) and it now has 9 inches of lift and totes 35 inch tires. At 61k and NEVER had a problem yet. Tom Eberline
Link Posted: 6/4/2001 10:15:53 PM EDT
I have a 3.0 in my Taurus. Do not go with it in the truck if you want power. I know a guy who has the same engine in his truck and it is underpowered. I would stick with the 4.0.
Link Posted: 6/4/2001 10:50:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/4/2001 10:49:01 PM EDT by Maggot]
I've had a ford ranger since feb95. I have had no problem with it besides a toyota getting wedged under the back of my truck, she didn't seem to relize all the traffic has stopped. Insurance fixed what was wrong, and I actually drove the girl that hit me to work after the accident, her car was totaled. (i'm a sucker for a pretty face) manual transmission. 4.0, has 8 sparkplugs first time I saw something like that. I changed the brakes for the first time last month. I have that electronic glitch every once in a while too, wiper comes on. I'm pretty sure it's from turning the ignition key too much foward. Would buy it again, it's been good to me.
Link Posted: 6/5/2001 12:22:49 AM EDT
When mention of the 4x4s was made, by all means get a limited slip. It might not be the best of the aftermarket manufacturers but for the price my god it's hard to beat, I've priced putting a limited slip into my truck so I could stop endlessly spinning one tire in the rain or so that I could gain a tad bit more traction and the price of aftermarket limited slips are just insane. My 3.0 can get up and move when I need it to but it's all cause I've got that 5spd in it. I'd rather have a 4.0 but maybe that will come with the next truck. My truck's speedometer has even shown triple digits on an occasion or two, it won't pull it in overdrive though. All of the Rangers seem to be happy cruisers at 75-80mph and only after 85 or so do they start to feel really "floaty."
Link Posted: 6/5/2001 1:09:52 AM EDT
don't
Link Posted: 6/5/2001 6:26:05 AM EDT
Get 4wd or none at all.
Link Posted: 6/5/2001 7:19:00 AM EDT
I have a '99 4x4 supercab with the 5-speed manual and 4.0L V-6. I bought it new. The OHC engine was not available in '99 or I would have bought that (I traded in a 5.0L Mustang on it. For that matter, if they'd offered a supercharger I'd have bought that.) I'm not certain if the OHC engine was available in 2000 or not, but I know you can get in on the 2001's. I have 23,000 miles on it now. So far it has gone into the shop for a recall on the wiper switch (magic self-operating wipers as noted above), and the drive shaft is being replaced on Thursday (warranty work - defective design causing slop in the yoke). Sometime soon Ford will be replacing at no charge the Firestone Wilderness AT 16" tires. Other than the wiper switch, I have had NO (0) problems with the truck, and if I'd gone in as soon as I received the recall notices I wouldn't have had that problem either. (The driveshaft replacement was a surprise - the dealer told me about it when I took the truck in for the wiper switch.) I average 18.5 mpg, which is pretty good for a high-profile 4x4. I have a 3.73:1 limited-slip rearend. It's capable of getting out of its own way, but it's no 5.0 Mustang. Then again, I couldn't take a pile of yard waste to the dump in the Mustang, nor could I drive it way the hell out into the desert on rutted dirt roads. I like my truck. I strongly suggest that if you get the supercab, look into the 4-door option. It makes access to the back MUCH easier. Skip the 3.0. The dealer will try very hard to sell it to you (Ford needs to sell this engine to meet CAFE standards for the fleet), but it's gutless. On a 2WD with the manual you can probably flog it to get some performance, but IMHO it just isn't enough engine. Avoid the four-banger entirely. [sniper]
Link Posted: 6/5/2001 7:28:34 AM EDT
why not get a 2001 f-150? I hear they have some real good crash ratings-NOT!!!!! Some agency gave them worst rating EVER.
Link Posted: 6/5/2001 8:17:39 AM EDT
If you like Japanese vehicles, get one of the Mazda Bxxx series pickups. It's the same thing as the Ranger and last time I looked had a 14000 mile longer warranty.
Link Posted: 6/5/2001 9:33:53 AM EDT
I bought my '94 Ranger SuperCab STX 2x4 brand-new, ordering it with the 4.0-liter and 5-speed. It now has almost 107,000 miles on it and has been a really good truck, except it fragged the trans 10,000 miles ago. Couldn't believe it; I thought that Ford's auto trans was a bit weak (especially in the '80s) but that the manual would be stout. That's not what the trans shop guy claimed. Still, I prefer the Ranger. It hasn't been too bad on brakes (only had to replace pads/shoes once so far). It gets around 17 mpg city/20-22 freeway, is pretty quiet and there are lots of aftermarket parts if you're looking to upgrade later. Some of the things I've tried: ARB air locker for the rear dif, which runs lower-than-stock 3.73:1 gears to compensate for the 31x10.50R15 tires I put on, in addition to a Superlift 5-inch front/3-inch rear lift. I put it in because I wanted the ability to run a locked rear at times, as well as have an onboard air compressor. Might do things differently next time. Superlift's coil springs suck. They start sagging pretty quickly. I'm investigating Eibach or National Spring for replacements. If you want lots of wheel travel, there are lots of choices for pre-'98 Rangers, the ones that use I-beam front suspension. You can easily get 12-15 inches of travel to make for a smooth ride off-road. (Rear travel increases are also relatively simple.) The newer A-arm Rangers don't have that potential yet, but it shouldn't be too long. (Look at the long-travel kits available for new F-150s.) [:)]
Top Top