I am beginning to wonder if spoog, wsn, or hind have logged on as a different user. Notice how this person is bashing the heck out of everything and anything with the blue oval....
Consumer reports rates the Ranger much higher in reliability than the S-10 enough said..
this Chevy vs.ford thing is just way to funny for me ... my dad is a DIE HARD GM man and he Really likes my ranger ... go figure
oh and by the way both his '89 Olds 98 and '98 buick regal both had to to have thier AUTO tranny Replaced withing the warranty.. GM needs to learn how to make an auto tranny LOL
At the same time he has NO problems what so ever with the 93 silverado..
and im just about to hit 10,000 miles on my 2000 Ranger with No problems what so ever.. except for that damn Deer LOL
so can we get back to ford vs chevy now? I dont have 4wd and never will, I'd like to hear responses from actual owners like me and their opinions, not just brand 'w' sucks look at this post.
Although I have never owned an S10, I did own a '90 Chevy 1/2 ton 2WD V6 5-spd. In June of '99 I traded it in on a '99 Mazda B3000 4WD x-cab 5-spd. Just some impressions/opinions of each truck:
Chevy - I really did like the drive train on this truck. Although rather rough at idle, the 4.3L V6 quickly smoothed out on acceleration. Powerful and torquey, the 4.3L never really felt underpowered while propelling the 4000+ lb vehicle. However, my impressions concerning other aspects of the truck were not as favorable. Build quality was sub-standard. The day I got it from the dealer, I discovered that the AC did not work. Within the first week, I found the passenger side courtesy light was non-functional and the dashboard on the driver's side was cracked. The AC was repaired, but the other two items were not resolved. At 30K miles, the truck started having trouble with the ABS system. The brake light would come on solid. I had it checked out several times, but always got the "no trouble found" answer. With an inoperative ABS system, hard braking on this truck was an adventure. It would easily begin fish-tailing during aggressive stops. Combine this with the truck's severe body lean characteristics and it got to the point that I just didn't feel comfortable driving it. In fact I almost rolled it on a couple of occasions. Other items of trouble were that the truck seemed to go thru batteries very quickly. When I traded it in, the vehicle was on its 5th. I always suspected some sort on an electrical problem, but never could pin-point it. I also had an incident where the metal air cleaner housing rubbed and eventually sawed a hole thru one of the AC compressor lines, thus draining the system of coolant. In summary, I loved the drive train on the truck. But I had some issues with braking/handling and build quality characteristics of the vehicle...
Ford/Mazda - The B3000 is a much different truck than the Chevy 1/2 ton, but some comparisons can be made. Of course, its 4WD capability makes it much more versatile. But the 3.0L engine can, on occasion, feel a bit underpowered out on the open road during fast driving conditions. However, as a commuter, or around town, or off road, the 3.0L is fine. And it gets very respectable MPG. 20.x in all purpose driving and 22.x for hiway. It is in other areas that the Mazda far exceeds the Chevy. Interior build quality and design are excellent as are exterior fit and finish. It's just a better built vehicle. You can feel it and see it. Everything on it has worked fine since day one. Handling, braking and steering are all superior as well. The truck corners great (for at truck), and does not exhibit the body lean problems the Chevy did. The front disc brakes with rear wheel ABS works very well. I accidentally found this out when I almost ran a stop sign. Emergency hard braking is arrow straight. What a pleasant, and safe, surprise! The power assisted rack and pinion steering is a dream. Very responsive. The truck is nimble and easy to park. In summary, the Mazda is versatile and does a lot of things very well. It is well built and a good value. It could use added power for certain hiway conditions...
If you should decide to get a Ranger, you might considerating waiting until the 2001 model year is available. The SOHC 4.0L V6 will now be available with either a 5-speed auto (currently mated with the OHV 4.0 only) or a new heavy-duty 5-speed manual (don't know if completely new or a beefed up version of the Mazda 5-speed currently in Rangers).
There should also be some other considerations:
(1) You can get incredible incentives now on 2000 Rangers, such as at least $1500 cash back and/or great financing.
(2) The 2000 4L is slightly revised, so little or no chance exists for the "wrist-pin" problem. It's a reliable, torquey, albeit noisy engine.
(3) Will the SOHC 4.0L in the Ranger experience any growing pains as 2001 will be the first year of its application? Ditto with the 5-speed manual tranny.
(4) Depreciation. The 2001 Ranger will be a revised body style. Will the 1998-2000 Rangers look dated? A newer body style will adversely affect the prior body style in terms of resale value. I guess this would depend on how long you plan on keeping your truck and how inclined you are to its looks.
(5) A new 4-banger will be available in 2001. It should displace 2.3L and be more powerful than the current 2.5L. I'd highly recommend spending the extra $336 to step up to the significantly better 3L.
(6) The 3.0L remains the same and is a decent powerplant when mated with a manual. A 3.0L auto is a bit doggy, especially on the highway. Engine choices, you gotta love 'em.
I am extremely happy with my purchase, a '98 4L 4x4 5sp-auto reg-cab with all of the goodies, for 18,500 after all of the incentives. It stickered for almost 24K, and I got very good financing.
Gas milage is decent, about 15-20mpg depending on city/highway mix.
The "Trailhead" Rangers have a 4x4 look (bigger tires/rims, foglight valance, fender flares, etc...) while being only 4x2.
I'm sure its a nice truck, my cousin has a new explorer I would consider a ford if I was buying new again however I have a new 99 S10 V6 that I'm very happy with. Its also loaded. I got the $1500 rebate when I bought it. I financed thru my local bank here in a small town and got good financing plus I get to make as many extra payments as often as I want and the extra payments are interest free, it goes toward what I owe on the truck. I never get less than 20 mpg, usually around 22, I'm looking for a tonneua cover, leer has a new one on their site, the LT2000 but it isnt available yet. Hopefully I can get 23-24 mpg with it.
The 4.0 ohc is in the explorer why would there be problems putting it in the ranger?
Does anyone know if Chevy will be introducing a new engine for the S-10? (maybe a V-8) I would think that they'll have to do something to compete with the ranger once it gets the 4.0 SOHC V-6. It's a much more powerful V-6 than Chevy's 4.3 V-6. -much smoother too.
The Ranger and Explorer aren't the exact same vehicle. I'm sure there will be some revisions made with the SOHC 4L in the first couple of years. They have already "detuned" the SOHC 4L to produce only 205hp and 235ft/lbs of torque in the Ranger. In Explorer form, it produces 210hp and 240ft/lbs of torque.
Glad you like your truck. Are you looking at a soft tonneau or a lid? Lids are very nice. It's like having a huge trunk, and they're a snap to remove to haul the bigger stuff (almost as easy as unsnapping the tonneau). You do need two people to handle it and set it aside. You'll definately get more out of it than a soft tonneau. Splurge on your truck. You'll like it even more.
I believe that the new I6 will be available in the 2002 S10. As an inherently balanced engine (only the V12 is another "common" inherently balanced motor), it should be smooth as butter. No balance shaft needed either.
We're probably never going to see a V8 in a mini-truck (I consider a Dakota to be mid-sized). You might see a supercharged 4L Ranger called an Adrenalin out from the SVT soon. Lightning's 'lil brother? We can only hope...
A lid. Also after I get the lid I'm getting the bedrug. My girlfriend and I looked at new cars today (so we didnt have to put up with salespeople) and there were 5 used S10/Sonomas and 2 Rangers so I thought I'd check em out. The beds were really abused. Obviously they're trucks and they get used for zillions of needs but with the bedrug and the Leer LT2000 I can take both off and put em on a new truck if I trade mine in. (end of year rebates ) ) I've moved alot of stuff with my truck and with a little care you can prevent most scratches etc........Leer says theres no drilling for this lid.
I didnt know Ford detuned the 4.0 but it sounds like there isnt much difference between the em woo hoo 5 hp. I have a question about the Rangers frame. Is it the same (but highly modified) frame that came with the 83 Ranger? I dont remember hearing about a new frame under the Ranger just modifications to it.
By inherently balanced, it means that the engine has no first and/or second order vibrations. So, it doesn't need a balance shaft. The configuration and firing of the pistons is balanced.
V8s have first order vibrations. V6s and I4s have both first and second order vibrations. I'm not sure about I5s. I think that opposed (boxer) 6s are balanced.
From what I remember, the 90 degree V8 has a 1st order imbalance. But, it is only minor effects on the engine. When you add a 2nd order imbalance, then it gets rough. That's why balance shafts are needed in V6s and I4s.
I was talking with a pilot about the engine, an I4, in his plane. On the tach there was a red line at about 3500rpm where you couldn't run the engine constant at. He told me that it was because most airplane engines don't have balance shafts. The engine would tear itself apart running at that rpm due to something about its harmonic frequency.
To me the ranger is the better truck overall. The only complaint I have is the engine choices comparied to the s-10. This will change in 2001 though. Chevy has good engines and tranys, but thats about it.
Checkout pickup.com for the future trucks. The new S10 may be coming out 2002, and will be the same size as the Dodge Dakota with a V8 option finally. The body is a lot more squared-off than current model. My brother with a 98 Sonoma high-rize doesn't like the future S10. I just bought a 2000 Dakota 4.7L 235, h.p., 5sd, 4x4, 31" tires, club-cab. This is the only truck with a V8 that I can get my truck and slide-in camper through a 7' garage door. Ranger and S10 sit higher off the ground with 4x4 and 31" tires. I can even fit a full size child's seat in the rear seat.
What do you think of the new D-C 4.7L? Everything I've read raves about it. Is it that good?
As for size, why should bigger always be better anyways? I might be considering a different future truck should the future Ranger grow. I wouldn't mind a V8 option, tho. The Mustang 4.6L or even the Lincoln LS 3.9L V8s sound like good matches.
The 4.7L is one quiet-smooth running engine. My with thought the truck died at a traffic light, and found out the hard way it was still running. There is just enough throaty sound though when you get over 3000 rpms to have fun. As far as power is concerned, I think my old 220 h.p. 5.2L was faster. But this may not be fair, because now I am hauling more wait (clubcab), larger tires (32" vrs. 29", and 5spd instead of automatic. The new 4.7L has 5 more h.p. than the 99 5.2L, but 5 lbs. less torque. One thing for sure the truck is a hell of lot more fun to drive. Maintenance should be a lot easier and less often. The oil filter on my old Dakota was a pain in the [non-permissible content removed] to change.
It sounds like a nice engine. Maybe more power will come into play when it's well broken in. From what I hear, Chrysler V8s need over 10K miles before they start pulling strong.
the s-10 can out haul a ford any day.And with a s-10 like mine with 201k on original engine and transmission it could still beat a ford any day because it is just getting broke in. And it is just better and will last much longer.
No matter how you look at it the S-10 is better than the Ranger. The Ranger is higher but has way less ground clearance and no more interior room. It also doesn't offer 31x10.50. My 99 Zr2 is the best for off roading. Also, where is the styling in the Ranger. The Zr2 looks aggressive for off roading and the Ranger off-road just looks like a normal ranger with a sticker on it. Where are the skid plates? On the S10. So for the same price I get fat tires, killer shocks, mean looks and a faster engine. I put on carbon-fiber head and tail light covers and it looks cool. It looks even better covered in mud. A Ranger doesn't turn any heads but all I ever see is people staring at my truck. Hey "off-road", did Ford come up with that by themselves cause thats real original. The only thing that competes off the cement with the Zr2 is the TRD but Ill never go foriegn. So from all points what is better. So whatever anybody has to say, they can say it cause we all know what is the better truck. As soon as Ford has to put some bulky fender flares on there truck to cover their tires I might be a little more leniant but Ill never leave Chevy. If anybody wants a pic of my truck ill send it just leave your email address and ill send it as soon as possible, even to you ford guys so you can see what a real truck looks like. Im Ryan from Missoula, Montana where there is nothing but off-road.
I am in the market right now for a new truck. I currently own a 97 s-10 Zr2 looking for a similar vehicle. Like the engine (4.3 v6) like the fact that it is a 'truck' (higher suspension, wider stance, just a brute) but I have had more problems than you can even count....Looked at a Dakota, but don't like the fact that you either have to get a R/T (lower suspension) for a 5.9 v8 (?) or a Sport Quad cab. Why can't you just get an extended cab sport with the 5.9? Any suggestions? What do you all feel about the 2000 Zr2?
If you are after reliability above all, I don't think that a Dakota would be the best choice.
The Tacoma and Frontier are very reliable, but they have nowhere near the engine that you seem to be looking for. Unless you get a TRD supercharged Taco (256hp & 267ft/lbs) the tune of nearly 30K. The Frontier is due out with a SC 3.3L V6 this fall with around 200hp and 230ft/lbs. Both of these trucks with a decent amount of options will cost pleanty and be more of a pain to buy with supply and all.
You might consider a 2001 Ranger. It now has the SOHC 4.0 available with 205hp and 235ft/lbs. It should be a nice step up from the OHV 4L. The Ranger is also a reliable truck. It's also easy to buy with low pricing and high supply.
If it's any consolation, the new 4.7 available in the Dakota is supposed to be a great engine and superior to the 5.9 motor should you decide to go the Dakota route.
Maybe you just had the preverbial lemon with your ZR2. Have you talked to any other ZR2 owners who've experienced similar problems?
Mind sharing with us the various problems that you have had with your '97 ZR2? Chevy10 seems to think his '99 is the best truck currently available. Just wondering...
cthompson21: Honestly, don't like foreign models, and the Ranger just doesn't look like a real 'truck' to me. Looks more like a Hot Wheel or something, but thanks for the advice!! I am on the lookout for other Zr2 owners that have had problems...
xena1a: Hmmmm, where should I start? *L* In November, I bought it with 82k miles. I thought, high miles+chevy=no prob. Boy was I wrong, unless I just got a lemon. Since then, I have replaced the tranny, (and honestly, it is STILL slipping) the fuel pump and sensor, numerous valves, the rear U joint, the master cyclinder, the passenger pinion, and I am sure that I am forgetting a few. I am also bringing it in tonight for the breaks. Just passed 90k though!!
superjim2000: Sorry, but as the thought of sliding into a ditch may sound appealing to some, I slip too much as it is in 2!!
It is a good web site and you should be able to build a Dakota 4x4 Club Cab Sport with the 4.7 V8. Not sure if the 5.9 is available in this config- uration. Good luck, but watch out for the Chyrsler Auto Tranny! I have heard of some trouble with it in the past. The problems may or may not have been resolved...
Please explain how you slip too much, do you get a lot of rain or snow where you live? I live outside of Chicago and with good tires and the ABS brakes I only slide the tail out when I want to ;o)
As for slipping, I live in MN=LOTS of snow and ice. Driving home after work in the middle of winter 5 miles I see at least 5-10 cars/SUV's on the side of the hwy. I just feel safer in a 4x4. ABS have saved me quite a few times, and I know, I slip purposely on occassion. (Only when I have my sister or my Mom in the truck....*LOL*)
xena1a: Thanks, I was looking for that!! I think that I am just going to stay with the ZR2 for right now. Got the breaks fixed and it cleans up pretty nice now. It's only a 97 too. so I might wait and see if whenever Chevy brings out a newer model of the ZR2....who knows....;)
Is it only chrysler that has those? Is it known for to be put into a Chevy? They SAY that I have a GM tranny, but I don't know....it's a POS as far as I am concerned....*L*
Heres a ZR2 page. http://www.infinet.com/%7Ehedkeg/ZR2/ As for a Dodge tranny in a Chevy, no way its GM. Theres gonna be a new S10 in a couple of years, I havent heard if they'll keep the ZR2 or not.
I hope that they do keep the ZR2, that's the only reason why I bought chevy....*L* Thanks for the ZR2 page, liked the T-tops, might think about getting that now....how much do you think that'll run me? And what about a moon roof? $?
To all you who say that the S-10 is unreliable are out of your minds. Ive talked numerous times to the service department of my dealership and they said they rarely have problems with S-10's. Plus for those of you who said the Rangers last longer, I see more old S series pickups than old Rangers. And to the Ranger 4.10 axle ratio, Chevy's tops that with 3.73. And about the skid plates, if the Ranger had any extra suspension, you might be able to see them. Still where is the factory lift. And look at the numbers, percentage wise, the amount fo s-10's on the road are more than rangers. Most people who have problems with their vehicles isn't because of the vehicle but because if the way it was driven. I know a guy who bought a Zr2 and before breaking in the motor he went flying around on the interstate and mudding and his motor blew up and you can hardly blame stupid things like that on Chevy. Still I want to know when Ford is going to put a lift on their truck and keep it the same price as the S-10. I have every option and my truck is still less than some Rangers. By the time the Ranger gets near 200 hp, in engine size, the S-10 will have a v-8 and we all know who rules there. Plus the guy who said Frontiers are well built i object to that. Those Nissan's don't last more than five years without noticable things happening to it. It's a good thing Nissan puts some big tires under those fender flares, but they actually dont. Those are my thoughts for today and im still looking for another compact pickup that offers a stock lift! See ya later.
Aren't you the guy that said that an S10 is a better off-roader because it looks better? LOL
I'll bet the service department would tell you that they never see anything come in. You know why? They want to sell you a Chevy. If it were true, do you think they'd tell you that S10's are always in and are terrible trucks? How long do you think that dealer would stay in business? Go to any make of service dept and you'll get the exact same response.
BTW, a 3.73 gear does NOT "top" a 4.10. The higher the number, the more torque put to the rear wheels. A lower number indicates gearing that is tuned more towards highway use (less engine rpm at any given speed).
That lift of which you're so fond is a $4,271 option. Holy smokes! Break out the checkbook! You still think that the price for an S10 will even approach a ranger? Uh, sure... I can think of a lot better things to do with over 4 grand than add a couple inches of heigth to my truck.
If you're curious, the Ranger will get the SOHC 4L this summer/early fall in the 2001 model year producing 205hp and 240ft/lbs. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a V8 S10. The S10 isn't due to get any new powerplants (which are a new I6, I5, and I4) until around 2003 (probably later knowing GM).
You beat me to it in responding to chevy10. You probably though that I was only a Toyota fan. The Chevy looks better in my opinion but I still question it's reliability.
IM going to answer every one of your questions right now. I wasn't talking sales. I was saying there is a higher percentage of S-10s sold than rangers still registered for example. If 10 90 s10s were sold 8 would still be registered while out of ten rangers sold only 7 remain. Think a little bit for me please. Next, I didn't say its a better off roader because it looks better but because it has more ground clearance, power and better shocks. Though it does look better. Also, the guy who told me about the amount of S10s in for service is one of my best friends and youd think hed tell me if they were having a problem with S10s. And about the gear ratios, they are the same at 4.10 i was mistaken. And about the price, the lift comes with a am/fm cassette/cd player, air, automatic lights so when its dark they turn on themselves, did i mention that includes the 4.3, locking differential, third door, tilt and cruise contrl, power windows locks and exterior windows, floor mats, tinted glass,sliding rear window, leather steering wheel, and optional wheels, 31x10.5 inch bfgoodrich all terrains for a total of 24,607 which is 500 more dollars than an S-10 with every option listed but the lift and the tires. Rangers (without factory lift) cost up to 26000 so that Zr2 package is more than a lift with beefy tires. That ends that argument. For your info Chevy's new S series line up will be available in the middle of 2001 and will offer a new 4.5 straight six predicted at 220hp and 250ft/lbs plus there will be an optional V-8 yet to be named so thats that. And that little knowing GM comment is bias. People who buy Chevy stay Chevy (everyone I know anyway) for a reason. I know many people who have gone from Ford to Toyota or even to Chevy and one of them was a Ford nut until i took him for a ride, he is now buying a silverado. Once youve had Chevy you dont leave. I used to work for a auto glass installment business and had to pick up and deliver hundreds of cars and the joy of driving a ford isn't there but its there with chevy. Vehicles were made to get you from place to place and that was fine with the model T but its now for enjoyment and peace and there is nothing better than Chevy. Thank you very much please state your thoughts.
Comments
Consumer reports rates the Ranger much higher in reliability than the S-10 enough said..
this Chevy vs.ford thing is just way to funny for me ... my dad is a DIE HARD GM man and he Really likes my ranger ... go figure
oh and by the way both his '89 Olds 98 and '98 buick regal both had to to have thier AUTO tranny Replaced withing the warranty.. GM needs to learn how to make an auto tranny LOL
At the same time he has NO problems what so ever with the 93 silverado..
and im just about to hit 10,000 miles on my 2000 Ranger with No problems what so ever.. except for that damn Deer
Chevy Cavalier (sunfire) 40% below average
Family cars
Ford Contour 25% below average
pontiac grand prix 24% below
Grand am 35% below
Chevy malibu 45% below
Upscale sedans
Cadi catera 125% below (ouch)
Large sedans
buick park avenue 25% below
Sporty/sports car
Saturn SC coupe 15% below average
Corvette 40% below
Mustang V8 40% below
camaro /firebird 50% below
Minivans
mercury vilager 15% below
chevy venture and all dirivatives 35% below
Chevy astro/safari 75% below
ford windstar 128% below (yikes)
Sport utes
Explorer/mountaineer 10% below
Lincoln navigator 15% below
expedition 25% below
Blazer jimmy 40% below
olds bravada 60% below
Pickups
Ranger mazda b 10% below
s10 sonoma 45% below
silverado /sierra 90% below
ok and now the counts
Ford motor company.. (ford, lincoln , mercury volvo, mazda)
14 vehicles above average in reliability
12 below average
General Motors.. Chevy , olds, buick, gmc, saturn, pontiac, Cadilac
7 above average
22 below average
now which company has a better reliability record... hmmmmm FORD
Just the facts here...
Although I have never owned an S10, I did own a '90 Chevy 1/2 ton 2WD V6 5-spd. In June of '99 I traded it in on a '99 Mazda B3000 4WD x-cab 5-spd. Just some impressions/opinions of each truck:
Chevy -
I really did like the drive train on this truck. Although rather rough at idle, the 4.3L V6 quickly smoothed out on acceleration. Powerful and torquey, the 4.3L never really felt underpowered while propelling the 4000+ lb vehicle. However, my impressions concerning other aspects of the truck were not as favorable. Build quality was sub-standard. The day I got it from the dealer, I discovered that the AC did not work. Within the first week, I found the passenger side courtesy light was non-functional and the dashboard on the driver's side was cracked. The AC was repaired, but the other two items were not resolved. At 30K miles, the truck started having trouble with the ABS system. The brake light would come on solid. I had it checked out several times, but always got the "no trouble found" answer. With an inoperative ABS system, hard braking on this truck was an adventure. It would easily begin fish-tailing during aggressive stops. Combine this with the truck's severe body lean characteristics and it got to the point that I just didn't feel comfortable driving it. In fact I almost rolled it on a couple of occasions. Other items of trouble were that the truck seemed to go thru batteries very quickly. When I traded it in, the vehicle was on its 5th. I always suspected some sort on an electrical problem, but never could pin-point it. I also had an incident where the metal air cleaner housing rubbed and eventually sawed a hole thru one of the AC compressor lines, thus draining the system of coolant. In summary, I loved the drive train on the truck. But I had some issues with braking/handling and build quality characteristics of the vehicle...
Ford/Mazda -
The B3000 is a much different truck than the Chevy 1/2 ton, but some comparisons can be made. Of course, its 4WD capability makes it much more versatile. But the 3.0L engine can, on occasion, feel a bit underpowered out on the open road during fast driving conditions. However, as a commuter, or around town, or off road, the 3.0L is fine. And it gets very respectable MPG. 20.x in all purpose driving and 22.x for hiway. It is in other areas that the Mazda far exceeds the Chevy. Interior build quality and design are excellent as are exterior fit and finish. It's just a better built vehicle. You can feel it and see it. Everything on it has worked fine since day one. Handling, braking and steering are all superior as well. The truck corners great (for at truck), and does not exhibit the body lean problems the Chevy did. The front disc brakes with rear wheel ABS works very well. I accidentally found this out when I almost ran a stop sign. Emergency hard braking is arrow straight. What a pleasant, and safe, surprise! The power assisted rack and pinion steering is a dream. Very responsive. The truck is nimble and easy to park. In summary, the Mazda is versatile and does a lot of things very well. It is well built and a good value. It could use added power for certain hiway conditions...
There should also be some other considerations:
(1) You can get incredible incentives now on 2000 Rangers, such as at least $1500 cash back and/or great financing.
(2) The 2000 4L is slightly revised, so little or no chance exists for the "wrist-pin" problem. It's a reliable, torquey, albeit noisy engine.
(3) Will the SOHC 4.0L in the Ranger experience any growing pains as 2001 will be the first year of its application? Ditto with the 5-speed manual tranny.
(4) Depreciation. The 2001 Ranger will be a revised body style. Will the 1998-2000 Rangers look dated? A newer body style will adversely affect the prior body style in terms of resale value. I guess this would depend on how long you plan on keeping your truck and how inclined you are to its looks.
(5) A new 4-banger will be available in 2001. It should displace 2.3L and be more powerful than the current 2.5L. I'd highly recommend spending the extra $336 to step up to the significantly better 3L.
(6) The 3.0L remains the same and is a decent powerplant when mated with a manual. A 3.0L auto is a bit doggy, especially on the highway. Engine choices, you gotta love 'em.
I am extremely happy with my purchase, a '98 4L 4x4 5sp-auto reg-cab with all of the goodies, for 18,500 after all of the incentives. It stickered for almost 24K, and I got very good financing.
Gas milage is decent, about 15-20mpg depending on city/highway mix.
The "Trailhead" Rangers have a 4x4 look (bigger tires/rims, foglight valance, fender flares, etc...) while being only 4x2.
I never get less than 20 mpg, usually around 22, I'm looking for a tonneua cover, leer has a new one on their site, the LT2000 but it isnt available yet. Hopefully I can get 23-24 mpg with it.
The 4.0 ohc is in the explorer why would there be problems putting it in the ranger?
Glad you like your truck. Are you looking at a soft tonneau or a lid? Lids are very nice. It's like having a huge trunk, and they're a snap to remove to haul the bigger stuff (almost as easy as unsnapping the tonneau). You do need two people to handle it and set it aside. You'll definately get more out of it than a soft tonneau. Splurge on your truck. You'll like it even more.
We're probably never going to see a V8 in a mini-truck (I consider a Dakota to be mid-sized). You might see a supercharged 4L Ranger called an Adrenalin out from the SVT soon. Lightning's 'lil brother? We can only hope...
I didnt know Ford detuned the 4.0 but it sounds like there isnt much difference between the em woo hoo 5 hp. I have a question about the Rangers frame. Is it the same (but highly modified) frame that came with the 83 Ranger? I dont remember hearing about a new frame under the Ranger just modifications to it.
Also was the Explorer built off the ranger frame at first? I'm sure they shared tons of parts.
V8s have first order vibrations. V6s and I4s have both first and second order vibrations. I'm not sure about I5s. I think that opposed (boxer) 6s are balanced.
I was talking with a pilot about the engine, an I4, in his plane. On the tach there was a red line at about 3500rpm where you couldn't run the engine constant at. He told me that it was because most airplane engines don't have balance shafts. The engine would tear itself apart running at that rpm due to something about its harmonic frequency.
I just bought a 2000 Dakota 4.7L 235, h.p., 5sd, 4x4, 31" tires, club-cab. This is the only truck with a V8 that I can get my truck and slide-in camper through a 7' garage door. Ranger and S10 sit higher off the ground with 4x4 and 31" tires. I can even fit a full size child's seat in the rear seat.
As for size, why should bigger always be better anyways? I might be considering a different future truck should the future Ranger grow. I wouldn't mind a V8 option, tho. The Mustang 4.6L or even the Lincoln LS 3.9L V8s sound like good matches.
As far as power is concerned, I think my old 220 h.p. 5.2L was faster. But this may not be fair, because now I am hauling more wait (clubcab), larger tires (32" vrs. 29", and 5spd instead of automatic. The new 4.7L has 5 more h.p. than the 99 5.2L, but 5 lbs. less torque. One thing for sure the truck is a hell of lot more fun to drive. Maintenance should be a lot easier and less often. The oil filter on my old Dakota was a pain in the [non-permissible content removed] to change.
Thanks for the info,
-C
BTW, the Ranger off-road pgk comes with:
- 16" all-terrain tires (P245/75R16)
- heavy duty shocks
- skid plates (fuel tank, xfer case, front susp)
- 4.10 axle ratio
There's your skid plates. If you want to try and bash a vehicle, at least make sure that you're right.
The Tacoma and Frontier are very reliable, but they have nowhere near the engine that you seem to be looking for. Unless you get a TRD supercharged Taco (256hp & 267ft/lbs) the tune of nearly 30K. The Frontier is due out with a SC 3.3L V6 this fall with around 200hp and 230ft/lbs. Both of these trucks with a decent amount of options will cost pleanty and be more of a pain to buy with supply and all.
You might consider a 2001 Ranger. It now has the SOHC 4.0 available with 205hp and 235ft/lbs. It should be a nice step up from the OHV 4L. The Ranger is also a reliable truck. It's also easy to buy with low pricing and high supply.
If it's any consolation, the new 4.7 available in the Dakota is supposed to be a great engine and superior to the 5.9 motor should you decide to go the Dakota route.
Maybe you just had the preverbial lemon with your ZR2. Have you talked to any other ZR2 owners who've experienced similar problems?
xena1a: Hmmmm, where should I start? *L* In November, I bought it with 82k miles. I thought, high miles+chevy=no prob. Boy was I wrong, unless I just got a lemon. Since then, I have replaced the tranny, (and honestly, it is STILL slipping) the fuel pump and sensor, numerous valves, the rear U joint, the master cyclinder, the passenger pinion, and I am sure that I am forgetting a few. I am also bringing it in tonight for the breaks. Just passed 90k though!!
superjim2000: Sorry, but as the thought of sliding into a ditch may sound appealing to some, I slip too much as it is in 2!!
link:
www.4adodge.com
It is a good web site and you should be able to build a Dakota 4x4 Club Cab Sport with the 4.7 V8. Not sure if the 5.9 is available in this config- uration. Good luck, but watch out for the Chyrsler Auto Tranny! I have heard of some trouble with it in the past. The problems may or may not have been resolved...
xena1a: Thanks, I was looking for that!! I think that I am just going to stay with the ZR2 for right now. Got the breaks fixed and it cleans up pretty nice now. It's only a 97 too. so I might wait and see if whenever Chevy brings out a newer model of the ZR2....who knows....;)
As for a Dodge tranny in a Chevy, no way its GM.
Theres gonna be a new S10 in a couple of years, I havent heard if they'll keep the ZR2 or not.
I'll bet the service department would tell you that they never see anything come in. You know why? They want to sell you a Chevy. If it were true, do you think they'd tell you that S10's are always in and are terrible trucks? How long do you think that dealer would stay in business? Go to any make of service dept and you'll get the exact same response.
BTW, a 3.73 gear does NOT "top" a 4.10. The higher the number, the more torque put to the rear wheels. A lower number indicates gearing that is tuned more towards highway use (less engine rpm at any given speed).
That lift of which you're so fond is a $4,271 option. Holy smokes! Break out the checkbook! You still think that the price for an S10 will even approach a ranger? Uh, sure... I can think of a lot better things to do with over 4 grand than add a couple inches of heigth to my truck.
If you're curious, the Ranger will get the SOHC 4L this summer/early fall in the 2001 model year producing 205hp and 240ft/lbs. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a V8 S10. The S10 isn't due to get any new powerplants (which are a new I6, I5, and I4) until around 2003 (probably later knowing GM).
Next, I didn't say its a better off roader because it looks better but because it has more ground clearance, power and better shocks. Though it does look better. Also, the guy who told me about the amount of S10s in for service is one of my best friends and youd think hed tell me if they were having a problem with S10s. And about the gear ratios, they are the same at 4.10 i was mistaken. And about the price, the lift comes with a am/fm cassette/cd player, air, automatic lights so when its dark they turn on themselves, did i mention that includes the 4.3, locking differential, third door, tilt and cruise contrl, power windows locks and exterior windows, floor mats, tinted glass,sliding rear window, leather steering wheel, and optional wheels, 31x10.5 inch bfgoodrich all terrains for a total of 24,607 which is 500 more dollars than an S-10 with every option listed but the lift and the tires. Rangers (without factory lift) cost up to 26000 so that Zr2 package is more than a lift with beefy tires. That ends that argument. For your info Chevy's new S series line up will be available in the middle of 2001 and will offer a new 4.5 straight six predicted at 220hp and 250ft/lbs plus there will be an optional V-8 yet to be named so thats that. And that little knowing GM comment is bias. People who buy Chevy stay Chevy (everyone I know anyway) for a reason. I know many people who have gone from Ford to Toyota or even to Chevy and one of them was a Ford nut until i took him for a ride, he is now buying a silverado. Once youve had Chevy you dont leave. I used to work for a auto glass installment business and had to pick up and deliver hundreds of cars and the joy of driving a ford isn't there but its there with chevy. Vehicles were made to get you from place to place and that was fine with the model T but its now for enjoyment and peace and there is nothing better than Chevy. Thank you very much please state your thoughts.
A comparatively equipped Ranger 4L, 4x4, off-rd pkg, ext-cab with the same options stickers for $22,500.
Exactly how do you get that a Ranger is even close to being more expensive than a comparable S10? Is this some form of new math?