2002 Ford Ranger Reviews - Page 11 of 14

2002 Ford Ranger Edge 2.3 Liter from North America

Year of manufacture2002
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 2.3 Liter Automatic
Performance marks 4 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Dealer Service marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.8 / 10
Distance when acquired18000 miles
Most recent distance24000 miles
Previous carBMW 5 Series

Summary:

Built Ford tough and slow as a tank

Faults:

A couple of pieces of trim have come loose or come off, no big deal.

The brake pads need to be replaced.

A mysterious squeak has manifested itself in the back end somewhere.

General Comments:

I was given this truck by my father who bought of all things a Scion.

Its hard for me to honestly critique this truck, since I haven't spent much money on it, but I'd have to say I wouldn't buy this truck new. It is seriously underpowered, and a 2.3 liter engine in a big heavy truck is borderline asinine. On hills you're lucky to make it above 50 miles an hour, and its painful to be passed by old women and kids on bicycles.

The automatic transmission is like every Ford automatic I've ever driven, it has a mind of its own, whether it is downshifting violently for no reason, or stuttering on acceleration, it doesn't exactly inspire too much confidence.

The biggest issue so far are the horrible brakes. I understand that it is a relatively heavy vehicle and isn't going to stop on a dime, but my 17 year old BMW that had sat in someone's backyard for 6 years had better brakes on it than this two-year old truck. Press the brake pedal a bit and the truck kinda sorta slows down, jam on it when the car in front of is in danger of being totaled and the truck violently comes to a halt with everyone in the cab being thrown around. I notice other Rangers doing the same thing, so I've surmised the brakes are simply underpowered like the rest of the truck. Ford should try sticking on some healthy calipers like Toyota does on its trucks.

The seats are comfortable, but the ride isn't, every bump and pit in the road can be felt in your spine, over rough roads its like handling a jackhammer.

On the plus side the truck looks great, with its canary yellow paint job and rides very high, and, being in a truck you don't get the sour looks that SUV jockeys get.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 8th February, 2004

15th Feb 2004, 09:36

Wow, you totally summed it up. I have a 4x4 2002 with the 3.0ltr and its ungodly slow as well. The transmission DOES have a mind of its own! On the interstate going 70 or 75, even a slight incline makes it kick out of over drive, sometimes into 3rd gear. Really makes the gas milage go to $@#&.

But, you are right, great looking truck, very sporty, and somewhat fun to drive!

2002 Ford Ranger XLT 4x4 3.0 V6 from North America

Year of manufacture2002
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 3.0 V6 Automatic
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.5 / 10
Distance when acquired20000 miles
Most recent distance31000 miles
Previous carMercedes-Benz S-Class

Summary:

Rugged 4x4 for an excellent price

Faults:

Nothing so far, in the 10,000 miles I have put on the truck.

Only upgrades I have installed are a pair of Vent-visors and a K&N air filter in the stock filter box.

General Comments:

I have never owned an American car before and I can honestly say I'm IMPRESSED! The seats are VERY comfortable and the 4 doors are very handy. Stock stereo system and speakers meet my standards for audio quality. OH YES and the shift on the fly 4x4 comes in handy on those snowy/icy days here in IL.

The two things I don't like about this truck:

Automatic transmission is a joke, its lost most of the time when it comes to shifts.

Finally, FUEL ECONOMY! Most cars I have owned get at least 75 miles to a 1/4 tank. On the Ranger I am lucky to look down at 3/4 a tank and see 45 miles on the tripometor. It leaves me thinking there is a hole in the gas tank. :-)

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 9th January, 2004

6th Jun 2006, 08:46

Could be hole in the tank or could be bad gas reader.

2002 Ford Ranger Edge 3.0 from North America

Year of manufacture2002
First year of ownership2002
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 3.0 Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired3 miles
Most recent distance18000 miles
Previous carChevrolet S-10

Summary:

Nice looking, you can hear it coming

Faults:

Some random rattling noise under the truck. Sounds like marbles in the gas tank, haha.

There is no red-line limit on the tach, I'm just kind of guessing.

Some rattling inside the cab.

Wind noise is starting to get louder.

Driver side window doesn't seem to seat like it used to. I really have to crank it to get it closed all the way (it's manual).

General Comments:

The rattling only happens if I have the truck parked and the air on. When the engine kicks in, rattle rattle rattle! But try to find where it's coming from! Impossible. I haven't tried taking it to a dealer yet because for some reason, they are always busy and want me to pay for them to just look at it.

I do, however, love the way this truck looks. Mine is yellow. Everyone complements me on it. It has some good get-up-and-go, too. I have only had a Chevy S-10 for a truck before this one. Compared to the S-10, this one picks up and moves!

It's a really great truck over all.

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

Review Date: 30th December, 2003

29th Jun 2004, 14:02

The rattle comes from your clutch.

A new redesigned clutch is available and covered under warranty.

Average review marks: 7.0 / 10, based on 48 reviews