Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Ford Ranger III



  • frey4frey4 Posts: 30
    for responding to my questions. i am trying to learn from this board. i want to be convinced that i made the right decision to buy a Ranger istead of a Tacoma. i have had so much trouble with the truck i am losing confidence in it.
    mostly electrical and tire problems.
  • davidb72davidb72 Posts: 174
    For a no muss, no fuss wax job try NuFinish. If you are feeling a little more ambitious you may want to take a look at

    I use the NuFinish on my ranger, the Griots on my Miata. I think they both do a good job, but the Griots is a little better with admittedly a lot more work...

  • allknowingallknowing Posts: 866
    The clearcoat paint used these days is a lot more durable and forgiving than in the past. If you want something durable, easy to apply, and without the problem you mentioned, try a showcar wax like Maguiars Yellow Wax. I started using Yellow wax, after trying lots of different waxes, when it was recommended at a car show. I keep my cars and trucks an average of 8-10 years and the paint has looked pretty much like new on all that I've used yellow wax on. The bottled type seems just as good as the paste wax too. I may add that I only wax the vehicles maybe an average of three time a year.
  • I recommend Maguiar's 4-step (Gold Class?) liquid wax. This gives you four bottles of wax that will remove the dust and dirt already imbedded, polish and protect the paint color and hue. In the store you'll find bottles labeled 1-3, then top it off with a gold class clear coat wax, and it'll be pristine. I even go one step further and put a light coat of rain-x car wax, as this really keeps the dew, rain and mud sprinkles off the paint. for reference
  • I use NuFinish. Won in Consumer's Reports. Easy to use, good results. Don't believe the once a year claim, do it at least twice (I wash with dish detergent, though).
  • beernutbeernut Posts: 329
    I could be FOC on this, but I blamed my dad's vinyl roof finish problems on his use of dish detergent. I used it for years on my cars, but became convinced it was a bad thing. It can't be good for the rubber, can it? My Ranger gets Turtle Wax car wash stuff. It works OK and the water seems to sheet off nicely but not too fast to prevent a good chamois job.

    On a different note, after some weeks away from this site, I see some discussion about "should I or shouldn't I buy a Ranger". Here are my thoughts: A) Mine is a '99 XLT, extended cab, 3.0L, auto. I love it. Never a lick of trouble, smooth and quiet and it hauls a lot. I've never enjoyed owning or operating a vehicle as much. B) I paid $15K for it new. It booked out on KBB last week at $15.2K. That's a good thing. C) Gas mileage? Forget about it! Its a truck. Welcome to truck ownership. Do I get 19.5 mpg or 21 mpg? Who cares? Read my lips ... T - R - U - C - K - !! (Did I spell that right?)
  • davidb72davidb72 Posts: 174
    Be careful washing with dish detergent, most of them strip waxes right off your paint. Use a milder soap that is made for car washing, only use the dish soap when you are really trying to strip the finish down to the paint.
  • Wax is basically Grease, which most dish soaps are proud to say they cut right through. You can get a jug of car soap at any parts store for under 3 bucks, and it'll last years.
  • danny25danny25 Posts: 119
    I was wondering if anyone else had this problem with their Ranger. I have a '99 XLT ext. cab and the driver's seat creaks and squeaks every time it moves, whether I'm taking a corner, or accelerating. I have taken it to the shop 3 times and they can't seem to be able to fix it permanently. Any ideas, or experiences in that area?
  • cpfeifer1cpfeifer1 Posts: 1
    To All:

    Last November, I leased a 2001 Edge Super cab Flare side with every option available. 4.0L V6, auto (only tarns avail at time) 4.10 Rear end (only way to get 16" wheels), etc. I immediately was surprised by the poor mileage of this truck, and went back to Landmark Ford in Tigard, Oregon several times to have it looked at. Having traded in a Mustang CT convertible, I realized I wasn't going to be getting the mileage of my Mazda Protege, but it was worse than my 1984 F150, or my cousin's 2000 F150 SC 4x4 with a 4.6L V8!

    The dealer was of no help. Two weeks ago, after consistently getting 12-16 mpg, I traded the truck in on a Jeep Cherokee at a loss. But now I am getting 18-22 mpg. I would not recommend this truck to anyone looking. Too bad, because other than the dealer problems and the mileage, it was nice truck.
  • frey4frey4 Posts: 30
    mileage is a complex subject. it is a function of vehicle weight, aerodynamics (i.e. drag), tire, ground clearance (i.e. turbulence), drivier habits, gear ratio, automatic vs. manual, and the nature of the engine and it's inherent need for fuel at a specific RPM. the Ranger 4.0 V6 is a gas hog for a number of reasons. if you are averaging about 15 in town and 18 to 19 on the highway (with an automatic) you are doing fine. if this is NOT GOOD for your budget, trade the truck in and get a Honda Civic.
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,124
    We must not forget these are trucks not cars. As was stated many factors will determine your mileage. As with the person with the 4.0 4x4 with 4.10 gears. This truck was geared for pulling and towing heavy loads, like boats and campers. No way was this truck meant to be a commuter or any truck in that matter. When I read 4.10 gears that said it all.
    I own a 1998 Ranger with the offroad pkg 4.0 5spd. I average about 18-19MPG or so with 3.73 gears... I know in these times of high gas prices we are all watching our gas gauges. This gas shortage is a joke. The oil companies are getting rich...
  • rear end gearing for the mechanically declined are the final multiplier of engine speed to rear wheel speed. 4x4's have more mass attached to the transmission which causes them to have poorer gas milage(even in 2 wheel drive, you still have drive shafts/axles turning both directions) Now a higher rear end gearing (4.10's etc) give you faster acceleration at additional RPM. Thusly 65mph with 4.10 gears could mean 2800 RPM, while 3.73's will allow 65mph at around 2500 RPM. Just guesstimates here, but hopefully this helps inform those who don't know.
    Also 4.0l vs 3.0l is a big difference in cubic inch. Cubic inch is the basically the amount of air and fuel that gets compressed in the engine. The larger the engine, the more power it can make, but there is more air and fuel it needs. If you own the truck you have many options to increase performance and MPG. If you are leasing, well you don't want to waste your money adding or replacing components when you won't own it in 2 years.
    The Edge package also has ride height comparable to the 4x4 rangers. Thats a lot more wind drag there too. Automatics also waste more with their different gearing. The manual is much more fuel friendly, especially vs. a 4 speed auto. 5 speed automatics have that extra gear, but automatics still suck up a larger percentage of power than manual transmissions,.
  • I have a 2001 4.0L 4x4 Auto XLT with "doggie doors", 4.10 rear end with "Off Road" package and a hard tonneau cover. I drive 100 mi R/T every day, mostly highway between 65-75 mph. I am averaging 18-18.7 MPG. My previous Ranger was a '98 3.0L 5sp and I was lucky to see 20-21. Normally saw 19 MPG. I thought the 4.0L and Auto were going to kill me but so far I'm happy. With only 2500 miles on this, so far, I expect things to get a little better. I just wish I could have gotten Off Road & 4 doors package with 5 sp (Wake Up FORD!). Yes, the gas gauge is screwy - looks like 3 - 3.5 gallons left when the "check gauge" light goes on (assuming 19.5 gal tank). I know, from past experience that I'll drop 2-3 MPG in winter. I also know that there are only 2 positions, other than "OFF" that the Air Conditioner will not run - "Single Arrow Head" & "Single Arrow Feet". Keeping Climate Control in either of those positions will save some gas.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Posts: 1,611
    ZYMOL, you get it at Target. Its cheap.

    Will make a junkyard car shine like a new penny.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Posts: 1,611
    Rangers take a long time to break in. Mine a 4.0 took at least 10,000 miles.

    I started off getting 16-18mpg. With the stock 235 tires it went up to 20 city, 24-25 hwy.

    I put on 31X10.5X15 tires and it went down a bit.

    My last trip 4 wheeling to W. Colo went as follows:
    When I what wheeling a bit and then driving hwy I got 20.5mpg. When I was returning home went from Delta Colo to Denver, 319 miles on 13.59 gal. which included a run up over the Grand Mesa taking the back way through to I-70, lots of climbing on one side.

    That is about 23.5 mpg.

    99 XLT 4X4, 4.0L manual 5 speed.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Posts: 1,611
    have a soft bed cover. I think that helps increase mpg a bit.

    Plus I run synthetic oil. Best thing to do to these trucks. It helps mpg and engine live.

    And I have the KKM filter, that adds a bit.
  • i forgot too mention this is a 4 cylinder,2.5 has stock tires , and sits high. is 240 miles , still normal. thanks to everyone who has responded so far.
  • danny25danny25 Posts: 119
    It depends, are you using all 16.5 gallons? I have the 2.5L 5spd also, in an ext. cab XLT with a 19.5 gal tank. I usually go about 350 miles with 95% city driving. I get about 21.5 mpg, to figure the mpg fill your tank the same way every time (top off about the same) and divide your miles by the number of gallons you just put in and that should give you a good mpg estimate.
  • allknowingallknowing Posts: 866
    Hey Vince,
    I agree with you about the gas shortage. Last I heard was that the refineries were operating close to 100% capacity and that there was an abundant supply of gas. I think the prices are simply a means to push a political agenda at the moment.
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,124
    not moving ahead on some models and putting them into production. The new 2003 Ranger will be delayed up to 3 years!!. Basically Ford plans on just doing tweaks to the present Ranger and not adding any new engines other than the 2.3 to replace the 2.5 4cyl. Bummer, I red the new Ranger was supposed to be about the size of a Dakota, and possibly have a diesel engine available and the engine compartment was large enough for a small V8....
  • jwmitch94jwmitch94 Posts: 1
    Is the old 4.0 a good engine? I have considered buying a new 2000 with the old 4 liter engine. They have one left and are giving me an incredible deal to get it off their lot. I have heard some bad things about this engine in favor of the new SOHC 4.0, but I will save about $3,000. I am not to concerned about the difference in power, I am concerned about problems or longivety.

  • derekshawnderekshawn Posts: 10
    Just a word of warning for all you Ranger owners out there. I had an unknown substance drip all over the paint (probably tree sap) of my 2000 Ranger and I washed it off within a week. But it was too late and the paint had cracked everywhere the substance had been sitting. It is currently in the body shop getting a complete new paint job at no cost because of warranty and I was told this was nothing new to the body shop manager. Hopefully the new paint will be a little more durable. Other than that, I love my Ranger, 19k miles and not one problem to report.
  • I've read stories on older Rangers getting a 429 or 460 with only have to relocate the transmission crossmember and flanging out the lower firewall opening. I think it was pre-97, but looks like plenty of room in there for a 5.0 or 351 easy... But maybe it's the newer ones you're referring to...
  • jfowlerjrjfowlerjr Posts: 20
    I've had my truck for 2 weeks now and I must say that I love this truck. The new 4.0 liter engine is wonderful, I've averaged 19mpg so far with 2 fillups. I have had two minor problems with the truck though.

    1)The hood wasn't centered when I bought the truck and had to be reset.

    2)I keep getting the stupid door ajar light and buzzer going every time I go over a bump in the road. Has anybody else had this minor problem and how did you fix it.

  • msalopekmsalopek Posts: 2
    Has anyone got info on the 2002 Ranger.
    Specifically any changes to the interior of
    a 2wd XLT Super Cab.
  • frey4frey4 Posts: 30
    the pushrod v6 4 liter is a fairly primitive design, and uses fuel, but i know a number of these engines that have gone 200K without rebuilding. they are notorious for sounding like "ball bearings rattling around in a coffee can". the engine is noisy, especially when cold. i have a 2000 Ranger with the 4.0 pushrod. it is great with the 5 speed auto tranny because it has a huge amount of torque. i love the drivetrain, but hate the "shakes" i have inmy truck. it vibrates to beat hell, and i can't seem to find out why. i am considering trading it in for either a toyota tundra or a Chevy 1500 series. i am pretty much done with little vibrating toy trucks.
  • mac74mac74 Posts: 1
    I just bought a used 98 Ranger ext. cab with the 3.0 engine and 4 speed automatic trans. I was changing the spark plugs and noticed that the three on one side are marked PG and the three on the other side are marked P. The owners manual says this is important. However I bought new Motorcraft plugs and there was nothing about this on the computer at the auto parts store. Is this just something Ford does at the factory to meet emission standards or something, or should I get new plugs marked in this manner?

    Also, what is this K&M air filter that has been mentioned alot on this board. Is K&M the manufacturer? Who carries this brand? I have access to Pep Boys and Auto Zone stores in my part of the country.

  • It's K&N, not K&M. Should be in either store you mentioned.
This discussion has been closed.