1994 Ford Ranger Reviews - Page 12 of 13

1994 Ford Ranger XLT from North America

Year of manufacture1994
First year of ownership1999
Most recent year of ownership2001
Engine and transmission Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Dealer Service marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.8 / 10
Distance when acquired28000 miles
Most recent distance57000 miles
Previous carHonda Civic

Summary:

Safe, reliable, sporty truck that's fun to drive!

Faults:

Nothing! :)

General Comments:

We bought this truck in 1999 and have had excellent luck with it. We recently replaced the tires because they did have Firestone. Besides brakes, plugs and fluids, we have had to do no major work.

I would buy an extended cab next time for a more roomy feel.

Nice truck for the price!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 16th September, 2001

1994 Ford Ranger XL 2.4 from North America

Year of manufacture1994
First year of ownership1994
Most recent year of ownership1999
Engine and transmission 2.4 Manual
Performance marks 3 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 3 / 10
Dealer Service marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
4.8 / 10
Distance when acquired0 kilometres
Most recent distance70000 kilometres
Previous carToyota Pickup

Summary:

A reliable vehicle with a low price

Faults:

I had tire flats at short intervals for no apparent reason.

The heat shield covering the exhaust system loosened up annually.

General Comments:

This pickup was bottom of the line, had a "brisk" ride, and never had a major problem. It was not economical on fuel for its size and was not particularly comfortable, but that was fine. It was stolen when it was five years old.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 4th July, 2001

1994 Ford Ranger XLT 2.3 EFI from North America

Year of manufacture1994
First year of ownership1994
Most recent year of ownership2001
Engine and transmission 2.3 EFI Manual
Performance marks 1 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Dealer Service marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired0 miles
Previous carChevrolet Cavalier

Summary:

An underpowered, but reliable truck

Faults:

The only time it's failed to start on me is when the battery terminals broke.

Just normal repairs.

General Comments:

This truck has a sorry lack of power, so don't try to haul anything with it.

You can't even get rubber with first gear, which is pathetic. I could get rubber in first, second, and third with my S-10, and the engine isn't even that much bigger.

The interior lasts a long time.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 26th June, 2001

29th Sep 2001, 16:10

I have a 97 Ranger with the 2.3 EFI manual and I don't what there doing wrong, but I can get rubber in first easily and on a good day into second (dry conditions). Plus, with a puny 2.3, what do you expect, it isn't a hauler or a work truck, it is simply a truck to get around in.

26th Feb 2002, 18:49

We have a 87 with a 2.9 and it will burn the tires off. It also has a lot of torque (pulling power) at low revs. So if you buy another one get a V-6.

13th Oct 2004, 21:19

I have a 95 with the 2.3 and I don't know what your doing wrong or what iam doing right I can get my truck to burn out really easy in first second and sometimes third. stock engine with 160,000 thousand miles on it so something is wrong with your truck.

1994 Ford Ranger XLT 2.3 from North America

Year of manufacture1994
First year of ownership1999
Most recent year of ownership2001
Engine and transmission 2.3 Automatic
Performance marks 5 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.3 / 10
Distance when acquired69000 miles
Most recent distance92000 miles
Previous carFord Ranger

Summary:

Nice economy hauler

Faults:

Transmission modulator had to be replaced at 85,000 miles (truck is an automatic).

Tires replaced at 75,000 miles.

General Comments:

Reliable truck, but with little real power. Combination of automatic and 4-cylinder engine isn't the best for acceleration.

Air conditioner works great, as does heater.

Truck is comfortable for me (at 6'4") but regular cab is a pretty tight squeeze for leg room.

Overall a very inexpensive to operate truck that's easy on the eyes.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 19th June, 2001

1994 Ford Ranger Splash 4 cylinder from North America

Year of manufacture1994
First year of ownership1994
Most recent year of ownership2001
Engine and transmission 4 cylinder Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 5 / 10
Dealer Service marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.2 / 10
Distance when acquired21 miles
Most recent distance53000 miles

Summary:

Reliable

Faults:

The paint has faded really bad.

Engine wise - has never failed, nothing repaired or replaced. Just pulled general maintenance.

General Comments:

Great looking truck when its new, but when the paint fades it loses interest.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 21st May, 2001

1994 Ford Ranger XLT 3.0 from North America

Year of manufacture1994
First year of ownership1994
Most recent year of ownership1973
Engine and transmission 3.0 Manual
Performance marks 3 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.6 / 10
Distance when acquired25 miles
Most recent distance200000 miles
Previous carFord Mustang

Summary:

Excellent vehicle overall

Faults:

The only thing to go wrong is the throw out bearing and the pilot bearing, both had to have the transmission pulled.

The radiator did clog up at 160,000 miles.

Other than that, nothing broke in over 200 thousand miles.

General Comments:

Excellent vehicle for economy and lack of repairs.

Although it is extremely slow, it consistently gets 25+ miles per gallon. Even with the engine having over 200 thousand miles.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 18th April, 2001

21st Mar 2013, 21:31

I do 75%/25% city/highway driving. I probably average about 18 MPG. I do notice that I get much better MPG on long trips, but I also noticed a drop in fuel economy when the ethanol was added to the gasoline. The 3.0 liter engine is very reliable, which makes this truck easy to sell.

23rd Mar 2013, 16:22

I've owned 4 Rangers since 1992. I owned a '93 and '94 model at the same time. All four were rock-solid reliable. The first three were XLT models with the 4-cylinder engines and 5-speed transmissions. They were awesome and got very good gas mileage.

My last Ranger was a Sport model with the 3.0 V-6 and raised Sport suspension. I liked it the least due to the much harsher ride, horrible gas mileage and virtually no improvement in performance over my previous 4-cylinder models. If I purchase another Ranger, it will have to be an XLT 4-cylinder.

Average review marks: 7.4 / 10, based on 48 reviews