Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Ford Ranger III

1…1314161819…23

Comments

  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    Thing is, I've asked many times on ttora and was told that 32s only fit alum. rims. I don't know why, but I'm asking now.
    It's pretty much always been my point of view that you can't really buy a serious offroader (except a Jeep, but we arent talking about that here). You sort of have to buy a base package, a TRD or FX4, and build on top of that. FX4 and TRD are both potent packages, but they provide only some things.
    Before you announce loudly the victory of FX4 over TRD, lets see it happen :)
  • kephart1kephart1 Member Posts: 3
    Tbunder the spare is not a donut it is a P325/75R15. I just got back from the dealer and they swaped four P325/75R15 tires from a 2W Edge and put my 16" tires on it. Problem solved. Also, there was a problem with the $2000.00 Ford rebate that I didn't think I received credit for. After a discussion with the sales manager, they cheerfully re-wrote the sales agreement for $1000.00 less. I am still in shock over how well I was treated. By the way the dealer is Vista Ford of Oxnard (California).
  • bolivarbolivar Member Posts: 2,316
    They kept your $2,000 rebate, then when you complained they gave you $1,000 of it and you are overjoyed???????????
  • smgillessmgilles Member Posts: 252
    265/70/16=30.7x10.7

    265/75/16=31.8x10.5

    270/75/16=31.3x11.0


    http://www.bfgoodrichtires.com

  • kephart1kephart1 Member Posts: 3
    They did not keep the $2000 but there was a misunderstanding on my part. They even had the sales rep's notes to show that I was wrong. Then they re-wrote the sales agreement giving me another $1000 off. In the end I got the truck for $250 above Edmunds TMV price. Still not too bad. The did have a legal contract, but in order to make me happy the cut the price.
  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    i think you meant to say it's a 235/75/15, eh? anyways, it is still a donut. ford does not put full-size spares on its ranger trucks. it says right on the tire limited use.

    also, are you saying you swapped your four 16" wheels and tires for the crappy 15's? if so, you shouldn't have. i told you, just buy a 15" 31x10.50 if you want a match. that, or find an old ranger or explorer (they have full spares on them, even the ones with 16" wheels) steel wheel and buy a 16" tire and put it under your truck. done deal. please explain. i doubt you have 325/75's on your ranger. you wouldn't be able to turn all that rubber. if you swapped for 235's, you went down over an inch in tire height.

    smgilles- your point is what? i knew all that.
  • mjbwrtrmjbwrtr Member Posts: 172
    help me out here. remember when i accidentally shifted into reverse while driving? well i got the fluid and filter changed after that and in the last 2 weeks or so i notice a growling noise...much like the noise you get when you put a manual tranny in too high a gear for the speed youre going...sounds like bogging down sorta. except this happens in my 2000 Ranger with auto tranny and 18k miles. any idea what this noise is? it doesnt seem to mater the conditions...it does it when its downshifting, mostly, but also when accelerating. also i have noticed that when i start it on a hill and put it in gear it sorta shudders a bit, like it wanted to stall. this is annoying to say the least. help me out here!
  • nerdnerd Member Posts: 203
    I am about ready to dump my 2000 GMC Sierra due to numerous problems in only 18 months of ownership. This time I am considering compact trucks (except anything GM). I have no brand loyalties, but I want an extended or crew cab that is solid and reliable. I need something with a six-cylinder engine and manual trans.

    I guess all of you are Ranger owners. I would appreciate your comments on why you selected a Ranger (I assume that Mazdas are the same as Rangers).
  • mjbwrtrmjbwrtr Member Posts: 172
    in my opinion, the ranger is the best looking compact and has the most standard features and has been the number one seller for a reason.
    i bought it and loved it. i did hours of research on edmunds and cars.com and by asking owners. the ranger just met all my needs best and was also the lowest priced model. the only thing i would caution against is, not to buy the four cylinder with an auto tranny...lol...i did, after a test drive on flat ground in town. too bad i didnt go up a hill or something, i would have bought the v6 or at least a stick shift.
  • eharri3eharri3 Member Posts: 640
    The Ranger had by far the best, most modern looking, interior. The 60/40 seats were much more comfortable than the S10 I tried, the 4 cyl had more torque, and the shift action was much more precise.

    I also thought the 2wd S10 was shaped like a slug and liked the styling of the Ranger much better. I have never liked that wierd, body-colored, wedge-type thingy on the back of the S10 they call a bumper.
  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    eharri-they haven't had that wedge thingy since '97. its now a real step bumper. at least on the 4x4's it is.

    nerd-ranger hands down is the best compact. most power, most standard features, best prices, safest, shall i go on.......

    toyota's are overpriced tin cans, that are very flimsy and come with nothing standard. everything is extra. not to mention you can see the spot weld marks below the rear window, and they're supposed to be known for quality? the doors are paper thin and their trannies are very weak. nice looking trucks, but looks don't sell a product, this is obvious by looking at the sales advantage ranger has over toyota, not to mention everything else in its class.

    i just sold my '01 4.0 4x4 off-road, it was the most solid vehicle ive ever owned, and ran like a scalded dog with that 210 horse engine in it. the ranger can be had with a 4 door s/c setup. try finding that in any other small truck. whatever you do, please dont buy a toyota and think you're driving around in a ferrari. it seems like once a person owns a toyota, they immediately get stuck up and for some reason, think they're better than anyone else. buy yourself a ranger, throw some decent tires on it, and challenge any toyota owner for a little run off, or off-road challenge. with its 20 horse advantage, they will slowly disappear. oh but they can have 265 horse, it will only cost them $3000 and a supercharger modification intrusion on an otherwise perfect underpowered engine. whatever you choose, good luck. you might want to check out the ZR2, i had two of them, and they were both solid as well. not as tight as a ranger though.

    ps. mazda is identical, but has a little better warranty. it also isn't as common. if you can find one, id consider a B4000. rare truck, and a nice alternative in which you still get the ranger's reliability and proven sales records.
  • eharri3eharri3 Member Posts: 640
    at first i thought you were calling me a nerd.
  • smgillessmgilles Member Posts: 252
    Here is a good website that you can read reviews from people on what they thought of their purchase. You can look and compare all compact trucks.


    http://www.carreview.com/pscAutomobiles/Trucks/PLS_1541_913crx.aspx

  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    interesting article. i did notice toyota owners reaming their tacoma for leaking, squeeking, thin body materials, bad gaskets in their engines, rusting, high msrp. the ranger owners seemed pleased. only one bad apple. he seemed like he didn't want his ranger to begin with. for each his own i guess.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    Oh...and who has the overall higher rating?
  • eharri3eharri3 Member Posts: 640
    Somebody's gettign their panties in a bunch.
  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    like scorpio finally found some owners who don't think their tacoma is handmade. scorpio, the rating doesn't mean jack. all you have to do is read the reviews of rangers and tacomas, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out the tacoma owners think they paid too much, and that they leak, fall apart, and rattle. one ranger owner was upset. nonetheless, i sure would hate to have a tacoma up here where we get snow. who wants leaky cabs? oh, and i won't even mention the quick rusting ability of all toyotas.......
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    Well, it rains here pretty good in Texas, we are in the middle of the rainy season. My truck stays dry inside. I don't know what the problem is. The one time I had water inside was when I forgot to close the sliding glass in the morning.
    I've taken my Tacoma into snow, had it parked in Colorado for 3 days and been through snowstorms with it. Nothing inside, again.
    You and I are both basing all of our opinions on the same "If its not happening to me, it's not true" principle. I can't say anything about quick rusting, we'll see in few years. The trucks I go offroading with don't seem to have any rust, they are 2-3 years old.
  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    right. but it has happened to others with toyota tacomas. one guy even said his '95 was way beyond anything new toyota is pumping out now in terms of quality. my ranger had four doors, i ran it through high pressure car washes day in and day out, it didn't leak one drop. has your dash fallen off yet?
  • nerdnerd Member Posts: 203
    I appreciate the input from all of you. I think I will look into the Mazda since there is a good dealer in my area, actually a Mazda-Jeep-BMW dealer.
  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    the mazda's are cool trucks. they are pretty hard to find too. i would have considered one when i bought my ranger, but i couldn't pass up the $2000 rebate. you won't see that on mazdas. for '02, mazda has an off-road package identical to the ranger's FX4. look for it. good luck. oh yeah, get the b4000. the b3000 has the 3.0, and it is gutless. but it is a good engine though. just no match for the 4.0's 207 horses.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    it hasnt. If it seems to be falling off for people who don't take their trucks offroad, I'm surprised that mine hasnt falled off the first 100 feet on the rocks. Maybe some people are just too whiny about things. I see something that doesnt look right, I don't run to the dealer whining to fix it, I just spend 5 minutes and do it myself. Saves me a day at the dealer. Thats for the small problems though. The second I have any sort of drivetrain/engine problem I'm gonna take it straight to the dealer.
  • nerdnerd Member Posts: 203
    Thanks for the advice. I'll go after the B4000.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    Why didnt you check out Tacoma? Solid truck too.
  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    he already stated that he wanted four doors and to save some money for basically the same truck (compact ext. cab 4x4). plus, the mazda B4000 is hardly ever seen on the road. whereas tacomas and rangers are very common as compared to the mazda.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    missed the 4-door part.
  • mjbwrtrmjbwrtr Member Posts: 172
    so did Toyota. *good natured laughs all around*
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    Instead, Toyota has a true 4-door truck, DoubleCab.
  • midnight_stangmidnight_stang Member Posts: 862
    Shall we get into the 4 flavors of SUV's next? :)
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    The suspension is rougher. SUVs are made for car-like ride these days.
  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    have to give toyota, dodge, gm, and nissan all credit for building a crew cab mini. ford is missing out on alot of the buying public who don't want the mistake sport-trac, and who would rather have a true 4x4 crew cab compact truck.

    out of the bunch, it looks like nissan is the way to go. the toyota quality is under very high suspicion and scrutiny. my god, this 'little' sludge issue could get huge and cost toyota billions.
  • mjbwrtrmjbwrtr Member Posts: 172
    Ford does need to address the lack of a Ranger four door double cab. I think with Ranger's looks and "driveability," it would be a nice truck.
  • eharri3eharri3 Member Posts: 640
    Except it's rear seat is more of an afterthought just so they can claim a true rearseat. Not a really comfortably place for anyone other than kids and short people to spend any amount of time. And the only reason I'd pay extra for a drew cab version of any of these trucks is genuine rear passenger space.
  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    the nissan may not be as large back there as others, but look at the price. a loaded XE 4x4 crew cab can be had for a little over $20000, and that's msrp. an auto is $850 more. you can't beat that with a stick. and the nissan quality is there as well. that 3.3 may be down on power, but i believe it may well be the most solid V6 in a small truck. i have read stories of it going 400K miles.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    as far as power goes, supercharged or naturally aspirated. 170hp isnt that great at all for a V6. Gas milage is bad, and that's before you put charger on it.
  • hciaffahciaffa Member Posts: 454
    I have to agree with many of you Ranger owners that Ford is missing out on the potential of having a 4 door Ranger. Funny thing is that in Mexico and in the South American countries such as Brazil and Argentina they do have a Ranger 4 dr. Its been posted on other sites and they even offer a small diesel from what was mentioned, I know that I would be interested in one ( trade in my 98 XLT 3.0l for one). I am waiting for Chevy's S10 replacement based off the new Envoy/ Trail Blazer with the larger body and 4 doors and that great 270 hp 6 cylinder.
  • mjbwrtrmjbwrtr Member Posts: 172
    i was at the dealer tonight and the mechanic looked at my tranny (it was making noise) and determined that the noise was not the tranny but the exhaust. since we had a little time to chat, we did. the guy was very knowledgeable and he said something that stuck in my mind. he said that the 2.5 and 2.3 were/are the best fours available. he said they beat nissan, honda, and chevy hands down, for durability. he did concede that if you add automatic to them, forget about gas mileage. lol but it was nice to have someone with nothing to gain, tell me that my purchase was a good one. maybe i will keep this one after all. i still would like a stick again but maybe i will settle for the auto.
  • p67p67 Member Posts: 3
    I am moments (well OK, days) away from purchasing a 2002 FX4 after driving a F250 Supercab 4X4 for the last 6 years. Doing a bit of "downsizing" you might say. I've heard talk of a redisign for the Ranger in 2003 and was wondering if anyone could give me info or a website where I could find out more about this before I buy a 2002. Thanks
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    Check out the news. Manual tranny V6 models have been snapping axles all over, 1 week out of the dealer
  • midnight_stangmidnight_stang Member Posts: 862
    It's been the joy of every toyota driver in the Tacoma vs Ranger thread that the 2002 FX4's with Manual transmissions have had rear differential problems/failures. It's been said to be a bad casting of rear differentials that can't take the torque involved without a torque converter(automatic). Don't worry too much, you know any problems would be covered by warranty. I myself am waiting to trade in my 1993 2.3l ranger for a 2003 model.

    I've been looking for something more concrete on the 2003 model myself, and have yet to find anything. Would be great if anyone can post a link on that, but it will probably be a few months before they come out before we get that. Rumors (?) are of a V8, diesel, crew cabs, and larger overall body are in the grapevine.

    Matt--->I totally hear ya. I figure 10 years is a good stretch of time for the first vehicle I've purchased (I'm 25 in May) but my next vehicle will probably be the 2003 Ranger, with a manual transmission for sure! Should be pretty good with the revised 3.0l v6, in regular cab trim. But I'll just have to wait and see what's going on with the 2003 model first.
    Also tonight, the local dealerships (Dallas, TX area) are advertising the base F-150 for just under 12 grand. Rangers still have 2000 cash back or 0% financing too.
  • mjbwrtrmjbwrtr Member Posts: 172
    i took my truck back to the good dealership i found. it was making a noise in the tranny and i wanted i checked out. the tech couldnt find a problem, but said he did hear it on the test drive and wanted to find out what the deal was. so he thought maybe it was something that just sounds like that, with the four cylinder fighting the 4.10 rear end and the automatic. so he looked on the lot for a truck with the same equipment. he couldnt find one. so one of the salespeople GAVE US THE KEYS TO HIS PERSONAL TRUCK! we test drove it and decided it was simply a noise they all make. we gave his keys back and he wanted to know what the problem was. the tech said "its a normal noise, but yours is louder than the customer's." lol...these people have been so good to me. i am so lucky to have found a dealership like this.
  • frey44frey44 Member Posts: 230
    Ford already has the Sport Trac (a 4 door truck on a wheelbase nearly identcal to what a ranger whould be). These would be 2 lines that would just cannabalize each other. Same truck..different name.
  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    same truck....different name they're not. a ranger is totally different than any explorer. look underneath, leafs are different, skidplates, shocks, ground clearance. the sport-trac is fugly as well as just a fancy explorer with a bed.

    the people that buy the sport-trac are not the same ones who would buy a ranger crew cab. i know, cuz i'm one. i hate the sport-trac, but would love a crew cab ranger. try taking a sport-trac off-road.
  • frey44frey44 Member Posts: 230
    Good luck buying your 4 door Ranger. If Ford doesn't go bankrupt in the meantime, I am sure they will oblige you by spinning out a 4 door Ranger. Hopefully, it won't shake and vibrate as much as my 00 XLT 4x4. Peace, bro.
  • leamingtonleamington Member Posts: 1
    Hi Guys,

    My friend has a 2001 ford ranger XL, 5-spd, with the new 2.3 twin-cam 4 cyl. We took it out the other day to see what it would do, using a g-tech/pro and stop watch…after three runs, the best 0-60 time was 11.8 seconds. He thought that was a tad slow and is bringing it back to the dealer to check the timing and some other stuff…I think it runs pretty good considering the trucks 3100 lb curb weight plus a 210 lb passenger on board. We weren’t able to find any publications with the 0-60 times for a ranger, 4cyl-5sp, most trucks were tested with the 3.0/4.0 v6. If anyone has info on this, please let me know…thanks
  • mjbwrtrmjbwrtr Member Posts: 172
    does my 2.5 liter four cylinder have a timing BELT, or a timing CHAIN?
  • stanclearstanclear Member Posts: 1
    My 2000 Ranger extra cab has a signal shut-off problem. Whenever I signal and make the least move
    it clicks off prematurely. There are also times it won't set until the wheels are straightened out. Dealer says its not a problem and is not adjustable.
    Anyone else have a similar problem or any suggestions. Thanks
  • frey44frey44 Member Posts: 230
    cancelor is a lousy design. I have that same annoying (and DANGEROUS) problem with mine. It is annoying senseless defects in design that always make me hop into my old Nissan PU (1989..171000 miles) that is more enjoyable to drive than my Ranger Shaker Vibrator Supreme. Good luck. There is no fix, other than a Toyota, Nissan, Dodge, Chevy or F 150 (which is a great truck).
  • midnight_stangmidnight_stang Member Posts: 862
    stanclear--->Try signaling before your actually turn the wheels to change lanes or turn.
  • webjeff2webjeff2 Member Posts: 21
    I also have an 01 Ranger XL 2.3 litre with a 5 speed and except for the fact that it's been back to the dealer for many repairs under warranty, it's a good running truck. I have about 5500 miles on it thus far and I too, have been curious about the acceleration stats on it but there have not been any published. I haven't timed mine, and although this truck is far from a racer, I have had an "improtu" race with both a 98 Honda CRV automatic and a 99 Chrysler Sebring convertible. According to Car and Driver, the 97 Honda CRV automatic has a 0-60 time of 10.6 sec. and the Chrysler does it in 10.8. Well, from 0 to approx 70 mph, I was able to beat both cars by nearly a car length. I'd say that it's a safe bet that the 2.3 litre 5 speed is right around 10sec. from 0-60. Also, there was only a driver aboard (no passengers) in all races. BTW, my other vehicle is a Honda S2000 and the published 0-60 time on that is 5.2 sec. according to Motor Trend but everytime I get in and drive the Ranger it still feels peppy enough to me for around town driving.
This discussion has been closed.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles