First Generation Ranger?

PhatPhungus

Active member
Joined
Mar 13, 2011
Location
San Diego
TDI
2000 Jetta
Things to look out for when buying a first generation Ford Ranger? Any years or engines significantly better than others? Problems to look out for? Experience with their fuel economy? I would prefer a carbureted engine. The diesel engines any good? How hard are they to find?



Basically I'm looking for a pickup that doesn't get godawful gas mileage and isn't as expensive as a Tacoma.
 

TDI_Dan

Veteran Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2011
Location
Michigan
TDI
2015 GSW 6M MKVII, 2011 Golf TDI 6M (bought back)
A diesel ranger? That might have been nice.
 

Ski in NC

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Jul 7, 2008
Location
Wilmington, NC USA
TDI
2001 Jetta ALH 5sp stock
Ford sold a few rangers in the late 80's with a Mazda 4cyl diesel, with some or all with turbos. I actually test drove a new one back then. Those have to be super rare at this point.

Rangers seem to be pretty tough. 2.3l engine and five speed is the way to go. Most seem to live their lives unloved and end up beat to h*ll. If you find one that is in decent shape, go for it.
 

PhatPhungus

Active member
Joined
Mar 13, 2011
Location
San Diego
TDI
2000 Jetta
I live in SoCal, so rust usually isn't much of an issue, but I'll be sure to check.

So far as I can tell the diesels are hard to find, what's better about the 2.3?
 

Jetta SS

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2006
Location
Grand Bay, AL
TDI
'98 Jetta
What was the first gen Ranger anyway? I used to have a 1975 F250 Ranger. Lookout for that 12mpg with the 460 :)
 

PhatPhungus

Active member
Joined
Mar 13, 2011
Location
San Diego
TDI
2000 Jetta
Ranger used to be a trim level I think. I'm talking about Rangers from 83 to 92, though that might actually be two generations in there.
 

bluesmoker

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2006
Location
Maple Ridge, B.C.
TDI
2004 pd 5 speed tip
Ford sold a few rangers in the late 80's with a Mazda 4cyl diesel, with some or all with turbos. I actually test drove a new one back then. Those have to be super rare at this point.

Rangers seem to be pretty tough. 2.3l engine and five speed is the way to go. Most seem to live their lives unloved and end up beat to h*ll. If you find one that is in decent shape, go for it.

they had a mitsu turbo diesel, bullet proof

the mazda n/a engines were dogs but also bullet proof

Available engines were the 72 hp (54 kW) 2.0 L and 86 hp (64 kW) 2.3 L OHC four-cylinders, a four-cylinder 59 hp (44 kW) 2.2 L Mazda/Perkins diesel, and a 115 hp (86 kW) 2.8 L Cologne V6. In 1985, a Mitsubishi-built 2.3 L turbodiesel with 86 hp (64 kW) replaced the Mazda diesel engine,

if you can find a rust free example get it
 

GoFaster

Moderator at Large
Joined
Jun 16, 1999
Location
Brampton, Ontario, Canada
TDI
2006 Jetta TDI
The diesels are surely to be so rare as to be almost unobtainable nowadays.

The 2.3 Lima engine was really common. Pretty sure those have a timing belt, so either make sure it has been changed, or figure on changing it. Wouldn't be surprising if this has been neglected. Later Rangers got a twin-sparkplug version of the same engine. I recall test-driving a new Ranger with that engine and 5-speed manual way back then, and thought it was pretty good (although I ended up buying a used Toyota instead). Eventually they changed to a 2.5 litre engine, which I think is the same one used in the Ford Escape, but this didn't happen until well beyond the range of model years that you are looking at.

The original Ranger used a mini version of Ford's Twin I Beam front suspension, and I would imagine by this time that they would likely benefit from replacing all the bushings. The steering in the bigger Fords tended to get really sloppy with age, because of worn bushings.

I liked the styling of the original compact Ranger more than any of the "refreshes" that followed.
 

PhatPhungus

Active member
Joined
Mar 13, 2011
Location
San Diego
TDI
2000 Jetta
Definitely agree with the styling.

Kind of a newbie to working on cars, how does the suspension work and how do you replace the bushings?
 

GoFaster

Moderator at Large
Joined
Jun 16, 1999
Location
Brampton, Ontario, Canada
TDI
2006 Jetta TDI
Google search "twin i beam bushing" and do some reading ...

The rear suspension is a plain ordinary leaf spring and solid axle setup, the same as practically every other truck. The front suspension design is unique to Ford.
 

BadMonKey

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Location
Colorado
TDI
2013 Focus ST
IMO the best old compact work truck is the Nissan Hard bodies (86-97). You can still find them for a reasonable price unlike to old Toyota pickups. We had one on the farm and it refused to die and returned better fuel economy than most.
 

PhatPhungus

Active member
Joined
Mar 13, 2011
Location
San Diego
TDI
2000 Jetta
Any other opinions on Nissan hardbody vs Ranger? They're going for a little more than the Rangers on craigslist, definitely less than the tacomas though.

What gas mileage did you get out of yours?
 

BadMonKey

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Location
Colorado
TDI
2013 Focus ST
Any other opinions on Nissan hardbody vs Ranger? They're going for a little more than the Rangers on craigslist, definitely less than the tacomas though.

What gas mileage did you get out of yours?
around 20-25mpg (no load) on the 4x4 extend-cab.
 

PhatPhungus

Active member
Joined
Mar 13, 2011
Location
San Diego
TDI
2000 Jetta

BadMonKey

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Location
Colorado
TDI
2013 Focus ST
Why is it that on old trucks 4 wheel drive doesnt seem to have a significant impact on gas mileage, but on new trucks it does?

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/byclass/Small_Pickup_Trucks1986.shtml

shows the '86 4x4 Ranger and 4x2 Ranger getting the same gas mileage, but this

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/byclass/Small_Pickup_Trucks2011.shtml

Shows the '11 Ranger 4x4 6cyl (can't get a 4cyl 4x4) getting significantly worse gas mileage than the 4x2 6cyl
Old epa system versus new epa system

Never experienced a truck that wasn't affected by the weight and drag of the 4x4 bits, the increased ride height alone affects fuel economy. Oilhammer pointed to this earlier with his fathers ranger that returned a believable 30mpg with a 2WD Ranger, i know from experience the 4WD version got no where near those numbers.

IMO its a must have here in Colorado as a 2wd truck with ice/hills = death but I would likely go with a 2WD in San Diego unless you are wheeler.
 
Last edited:

PhatPhungus

Active member
Joined
Mar 13, 2011
Location
San Diego
TDI
2000 Jetta
There's a chance I'll be moving to the Pittsburgh area, but that's a couple years off anyway, so I'll probably go with the 4x2.
 

SomeJ

Veteran Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2011
Location
central New Mexico
TDI
2011 JSW TDI 6m
My first vehicle was a fixed up 2.0L 84' ranger with 4 speed manual just 4x2. I loved that little truck. Rebuilt the engine by myself the summer between my jr and sr years of high school due to putting in a new cam(because it seemed fun, and was not needed) that caused some already stressed rings to go ahead and shoot craps (Im not a mechanic, just a techy who can read a manual, they are that easy to work on). Very easy to work on, lots of room under the hood. I stripped off almost every stupid vacuum tube that I could. (the only one that was absolutely needed was for advancing the timing, as far as i was able to tell) Mileage on the 2.0 was around the 18-20 range with mixed hw/city driving (in kansas so fairly flat roads). I would definitely go with the 2.3 if you do go with a ranger. The engines were used longer and in more things. Iv actually seen the same 2.3 engines used in endurance cars and they cleaned up the field. Lots of "mods"/interchangeable parts out there for them. The truck had a factory installed aftermarket AC that actually put enough load on the 2.0 that you had to work the gas while sitting at a stop light if the AC was on LOL (gotta love that old 2.0 power). I actually bought my VW because I missed driving my ranger so much. (manual to auto, now back to manual) Selling the ranger to my cousin who totaled it 6 months later was the worst decision I ever made in regards to vehicles, and not a day goes by that I wish I still had it, even with the new VW which is fun as hell to drive.

The one big problem I had with that thing was the starter and solenoid, I think in the 7 years I had it I put on 3 or 4 starters, and just as many if not more solenoids. In the 70k I put on it only went through 1 distributer cap, and 1 set of plug wires, and 1 alternate that was new when I got it. I had to pull off the EGR pump before it hit 100k as it crapped out and any parts related to it. Kansas doesn't have any emissions inspections so it was no big deal here (actually got better mileage after that due to the strain the crapped out pump was putting on the engine).

Good luck with your search!
J
( i actually found my old Chilton's (sp) book for it the other day... good times... good times..)
 
Top