1992 Ford Ranger Sport 3.0 V6

Summary:

A solid small pickup

Faults:

Nothing so far.

General Comments:

It was poorly maintained by the last owner, I bought it cheap so I had a truck when I needed one. I have put about $500 worth of parts into it to get it to a decent drivable state.

The frame is in excellent shape for spending its life in the northeast, the body is good for its age. I sold my 77 F-100, it was more truck than I needed, this Ranger is a good size for me, just wish it was an extended cab.

Fuel economy seems rather good, not sure what I'm getting, but I would guess about 23-24.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 5th January, 2012

1992 Ford Ranger XLT Supercab 3.0 6 cylinder

Summary:

Great for work and play. Love it

Faults:

Replaced muffler system, new alternator, new tires, brake line, front end rod, and oil gauge never worked.

General Comments:

What I listed above is nothing. The truck is awesome, I love it. I paid $1800, put in not at 1 time, maybe $1.000. The truck has 400.000 miles, and still works and plays hard. Love mine. Two thumbs up for my Ranger.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 21st December, 2010

1992 Ford Ranger XLT 2.3L 4 cylinder

Summary:

A great little truck. Perfect for anyone

Faults:

Typical cosmetic wear/damage to interior and exterior.

Paint on hood and roof (mostly along the middle) is chipping/flaking off.

Driver-side door will not open from inside. (It did when I first bought it. It is a cable I haven't gotten around to replacing).

Reverse gear cage bearing failed, locking the transmission (approximately 150,000 miles). Repaired myself for $24.00 in parts and probably 4 hours work.

General Comments:

This truck is small but solid. Until the reverse-gear bearing failed, I had had no problems with it.

Easy to work on/maintain.

Decent on gas.

Inexpensive to repair (if doing the work yourself. I cannot comment on having it repaired by someone else.)

The extended cab is nice and allows you to substantially recline the driver and passenger seats.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 3rd December, 2010

1992 Ford Ranger xlt 4 cylinder

Summary:

It is the greatest truck I've ever owned

Faults:

I have had few problems with it, but some.

I have replaced the driver side washer in the hub, replaced the filler neck and both parking brake cable and inside door cable snapped within the first month.

When I bought it it had very bad rust on the outside.

General Comments:

The trucks motor ran very strong.

The trucks seats were very uncomfortable so I switched them out for 98 Ranger seats.

The truck is great I will drive it till the motor drops out and then some.

For a 4 cylinder the truck has a lot of power.

I love the 5 speed that it has in it. It's very quick.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 19th July, 2010

1992 Ford Ranger XLT 2.9 V6

Summary:

Awesome truck

Faults:

At 198,000 I replaced the tires with brand new Grabber At/2's and had an alignment done because winter was coming..

At about 200,000 I replaced the alternator.

That's about it.

General Comments:

The 2.9 has good power, I don't get where people say they're under powered.. at least my 5spd truck has a good amount.. with almost 202,000 miles, the truck starts and runs just like it should.. drives great for a '92, and the stock radio is good too..

I've pulled people out of ditches, drove thru snowbanks when the plow guys decided to plow the bank across the road 1 day, and other than breaking the grille a little more than it was, didn't hurt a thing... drove snow covered roads with no issues in 4x4, sometimes it's fun to take it out of 4x4 and see just how bad the roads are.. it's not the best in the snow in 2WD, 4x4 is much better, but it's probably due to the high center of gravity...

I did take the truck off the road a month ago, but only because I bought a '98 Ranger 2WD for the summer

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 26th April, 2009

24th Dec 2009, 17:38

Me thinks the compression is gone in my 2.9 ha ha. Rolls away on me in gear.. all new in tranny. But at 66657 miles and still going.. I'm impressed, yes that's real miles.. and I'm still putting them on.. LOL. But I gotta put a block behind the wheels when I stop.

25th Dec 2009, 11:43

66K miles and you're impressed?

25th Dec 2009, 18:38

66,657 miles? That's it? And you're already losing compression and have replaced the transmission? That's not good at all. My current vehicle (a Plymouth Neon) has over 86,000 miles on it now, and it hasn't had any of the problems your truck has at only 66,000 miles. My first car (a '74 Civic) had over 500,000 miles on original everything. Dump that clunker.

24th Dec 2012, 20:13

The odometer rolls over after 100k miles on these trucks. This poster likely has 166,657 miles. More likely 266,657. My '92 Ranger reads 58,000 on the odometer with an actual mileage of 258,000 (about 12,000 miles a year).