Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Ford Ranger III
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
A front skidplate is also available now for your Rangers. I am reading around the net it wouldn't take much to mount this under 98 and above Rangers..Just an FYI..
Thanks, considering a 2001 Ranger.
Then I learned that Ford won't sell this engine with a manual transmission in the 2WD model.
They only sell it with the automatic which has had "thumping and rattling" appear after 30000 mi.
I question the wisdom of a company that won't put a manual transmission in a pickup. It's like selling a hamburger without ketchup available.
Is this true? Is the only 2001 regular-cab 4x4 an expensive Edge model? What about an XL or XLT 4x4? What about the long-wheelbase version? Or is carsdirect.com's database not up-to-date?
Does anyone out there have info on this?
Ouch! So much for trading in my old Ranger long-bed 4x4 for a 2001.
My problem is with the delay wipers. With 95,000 miles on the truck, the wipers have stopped functioning properly. They will move up somewhere between a few inches, and all the way up. The wipers will work when turned full on - low, or high, but screw up on delay. I have taken the stalk apart, and cleaned all contacts, and I have found the little relay box (way up behind the radio) and removed it, cleaned it, and put it back. The delay function is still messed up. Should I just break down and start replacing parts ($102 for the stalk, and $55 for the relay box), or is there a fix?
Also, my 4.0L engine knocks and pings like made when I use anything other than Super or Supreme gas. The mid-grade and regular result in massive noises from under the hood. I have tried fuel additives, and they don't work. I will be buying a decarbonizing kit, some time in the future, but until then, I put high-test in it.
The only problems other than these have been, front brakes ($62 for pads and labor), A/C charge (R-134, $24), and a thermostate ($7.50).
This is my second Ranger, and probably won't be my last.
Pocahontas,
Edmunds.com/Roving Host
kit, there is a price difference between a Ranger and an F150. You can get pretty well loaded new 4x4 Rangers for about 18K. A comparably optioned F150 will cost you at least 2-3K more. On another note. If you ever go offroading in many cases a full size won't fit into places a compact 4x4 can. I do agree Ford let its gaurd down too long with its engine line-up in the Ranger. Toyota and GM stomped the Ranger when it came to HP figures. I don't think your going to see a V8 Ranger anytime soon. The demand is just not there. A V6 does me just fine for what I need to haul and tow.
My only complaint is I'd like truck that gets better MPG. I tend to buy cars/trucks and keep them 10 years or so. There's no telling where gas prices will be in a few years. That's why I'm looking forward to test driving the 2.3L 4cyl Ranger when it becomes available. I'll buy one of those or maybe an S10.
Just my thoughts.
I'd like the Ranger to remain a real compact, but it would be fine if Ford wants to build a V8-powered midsize Dakota competitor. Just don't stop building compacts the way Dodge did!
http://www.fordvehicles.com/trucks/ranger/
At last!
model ranger or any option in between in 6 or 7
foot bed with 4 cyl .In 2001 you can't get a 7 foot
bed with 4 cyl, and the only options you can get
with a 4 cyl are tilt & cruise, automatic and an
appearance package. No cassette/CD,No sliding rear
window. To get the cassette/CD from the factory I
have to get a 3.0 L V6 Styleside Appearance Group
(336A)Thats fully loaded with 5 speed automatic
(don't want) chrome wheels, white letter
tires,cassette/CD (want that)power windows mirrors
locks and transmitter (don't want any of those and
a bed rail cover.
Whats with that,last year you could order options
seperately, this year it's all or nothin.
If I buy a 2001 ranger 4 cyl standard shift I will go to a Truck assessory store and have a sliding rear window
installed and a electronics store to have a
cassette/CD alarm installed at fords lost.The only
thing I won't get is a 7 foot bed,oh well.
The 1 reason I want a 4 cyl is the price of gas,I beleave we will never see $1.00 gas again and gas will be least $1.50 and closer to $2.00 It will be my only vehicle and I need a truck to haul grass,leaves,sticks,small boat and other dirty stuff. Hey I live in the country.
BIGMAX
But here's something odd. If you look at the bottom of the Ford Media page, it lists towing capacity for both 4cyl short-beds and long-beds!
http://media.ford.com/products/presskit_display.cfm?vehicle_id=238&press_section_id=398
Now I'm confused.
I hope it's wrong. The 7' weighs only about 60 pounds more than a 6' bed.
A friend has a 97 4 banger 7' Bed 2.3 shift it yourself 5 speed and I love it, sure you have to shift to make it up a long hill but it will make it up most in 4th and he gets at least 25 mpg. Hey thats great for a pickup. He has a 10' aluminum boat with trollin motor and he loads it in the back with the battery and tackle and you don't even know its there.
I hope ford realizises that fuel mileage is important to some people and they let you get the 7' bed with the new 4 banger and let us get all the options thats avalable with the V6 and seperate the options I don't want automatic,power locks windows mirrors.But I do want CD/cassette and sliding rear window and cruise/tilt wheel.
Al
They say the 3.0L V6 has 14 to 1 compression ratio.
I now believe the brochure is correct on the 7' bed.
Al
I guess I'll buy used (again), maybe an old 2.3L Ranger or a Frontier. At least the Frontier has a 6.5 foot bed.
I read somewhere (in blueovalnews.com I think) that they have changed their mind about offering the 4.0L with the regular cab. Believe it or not, they originally weren't going to offer it. Now I understand they will. So maybe they'll change their mind about the 2.3L as well.
The 2.5 auto average is 22 the 3.0 is 18
The new 2.3 is supposed to beat the 2.5 by 2 mpg average that would be 26 for the manual 7 better.
Also you can't get the 3.0 with the manual on the XLT 7' box. To get the manual with the 7' box you have to settle for the XL without a lot of features like no box light no armrest storage no map pockets in the doors no map lights no carpet.
Ford has really screwed up the options for 2001.
check out www.fueleconomy.gov
Al
I sure hope they change their mind in the U.S. too:
--offer the 2.3L (at least give us the 5sp manual) with the 7' bed for guys like me interested in MPG;
--offer the 4.0L with the regular cab 4X2 for the sport-truck crowd.
My guess is they've cut down on the number vehicle combinations to save $$. If they "save" enough, I just might not buy another Ford. Congrats, Ford, you sure "saved" a lot!
Thanks, tacoma_trd, for the fueleconomy.gov link. It's a good site for MPG-obsessed people like me!
At the risk of offending a lot of people in this forum, let me start the ball rolling:
--Replace the current OHV 3.0L in favor of the 200hp OHC 3.0L found in Taurus etc. This is a better base engine for 4x4 models and an excellent upgrade for cheaper 4X2 models. OR, if Ford really really has to cut down on the number of vehicle combinations to cut $$, drop the 3.0L altogether. The engine lineup would then be similar to Chevy's: a base 2.3L (hey,140hp isn't TOO bad) and a +200hp 4.0L V6 for 4x4s, sport trucks, etc.
--Offer a light-weight AWD system (like new Escape) as a upgrade to 4x2 models. AWD systems are VERY popular in SUVs and sedans (Subaru etc.) in northern regions where there's snow/bad weather/etc. Why not in a pickup? I'm thinking of an $1K option that adds 100-200lb to the weight of the truck. Offer it with all engine options, including the 2.3L 4cyl. (You can get the 4cyl Escape with AWD.)
--Crew-cab version with 5' bed.
--Of course, still offer a true heavy-duty 4x4 model for the offroad crowd. My old Ranger 4x4 is a lot of fun, even with only 115hp out of the old 2.8L V6! But I want MUCH better MPG from my next truck.
--Develop a brand-new midsize pickup/SUV platform to compete with the Dakota. There's obviously a lot of interest in midsize pickups. This new midsize would have V6s and V8s. Keep the Ranger a real compact, Ford!
Just my thoughts.