Front brakes need replacement.
Catalytic Converter needs replacement.
This truck had very high mileage when I purchased it, but after the great experience I had with my '92 Escort I didn't feel it was an issue. It has not let me down yet...
The engine doesn't leak a drop of oil, and every time I check it, it looks as if it just came out of the bottle. Very clean!!
I am not one of the most careful drivers and have had it down trails in the middle of the woods, in puddles that reach the bottoms of the doors, in the middle of mud fields, etc...
I bought a truck for the benefits of having a truck. I don't "baby" it, or wax it on Sunday's. I treat it like a truck and it treats me like a king.
When I bought it, it was valued at $3,200.00 more than the asking price because of a dent on the bed, apparently caused by a 4x4 piece of lumber that fell on it. I'm not big on vanity so something like that would never keep me from purchasing a vehicle. The last time I checked, the truck was still valued (per Kelly's Blue Book) at $1,800.00 more than I originally paid for it and now I dont owe anything on it.
When it comes to 4-cylinders, Ford is #1 in my book!!
You have the best built small truck made. The 2.3 Rangers will go 300,000+ miles with virtually no problems. I've had 4 Rangers since 1991, and none has ever had a single problem. My brother-in-law has a company that uses Rangers (most companies that use small trucks won't use anything else because Rangers are so reliable) and some of these company trucks have been in service since '94 or '95 with virtually no problems at all.
No, the Ranger is not the best small truck made. In fact, it may be the worst. The truth is, the 2.3 will go about 60-70,000 miles until it begins to self-destruct. Sensors and smaller components begin to go, it starts to run rough, then the major problems begin. To anyone using this site because they are considering the purchase of a Ranger: DON'T buy one. Don't believe that these trucks get 300,000 miles on them; realistically they are completely spent after about 110,000 to 130,000 miles, and it takes money to get them to run for that long. Besides, even if you get lucky and get a Ford 4-cylinder that holds together for more than 130,000 miles, you probably will have to have replaced the transmission by then. If you want a truck that is actually worth the price, buy a Nissan or a Toyota. And if you are just looking for a good 4-cylinder motor, buy a Honda; they made a MUCH better 4-cylinder engine in 1981 than Ford does today. Don't be fooled by Ford fanatics who post false numbers and false information.
OK lets see. Ford Rangers are not the best selling trucks for the past 20 plus years because they self-destruct. My grandpa has a 88 ranger 2.3 L. 5spd. It was used in florida, I believe it was, to pull small boats for the first 100,000 miles. Then my grandpa bought it. It now has about 275,000. It still has the same transmission and engine.
To the 8th Dec 2006, 18:06 commentor. oh really?
So then explain why my truck, a 1994 Ford Ranger, has 336,177 miles on it, and I have had it in the shop for one reason, worn out bushings in the front end. well, that and regular maintenance. I beat the hell out of mine too, it never gets a break.
Explain why my friend's ranger, 287,000 miles has not been in the shop once for a repair, and he beats the crap out of it, in the mountains, running into stuff, been rear ended (almost no damage) and such.
Explain why my fathers company, yards r' us, owns 11 1996 model year Rangers, all automatics, and they all have over 400000 miles on it with very little problems.
Explain all the other reviews of this truck that PROVE this trucks durability and longevity?
Please, feel free to explain all these!
Watch the brand new Ford F150 commercials on TV... it addresses your high mileage comments.
Sure I can explain it. I don't believe any of it. You're saying that you and your friend off-road in the mountains, run into stuff, and beat the hell out of these trucks, and they've NEVER been in the shop with that kind of mileage, or at least not more than once? Sorry, I don't think so. NO truck ever made could really take hard abuse for that long and that many miles and not be in the shop a few times AT LEAST. Definetely not a Ford Ranger. As far as your dad's trucks, I'm guessing that you're exaggerating quite a bit about the mileage, and you don't really know when they have been in the shop or for what, although it's common for fleet vehicles of any make to get high mileage because they get driven so much in a short period of time. But all 11 of them with over 400,000 miles? I doubt it. Like I said, false numbers and false information.
"I don't believe it." Yes, that's the way to evaluate information! You won't believe anything good about a Ford, and you won't believe anything bad about a Toyota. I wish you people would quit this childish arguing about pointless statistics gleaned from out-of-date websites and biased car magazines. The point of this site is to read the personal experiences of car owners, it is not a blog or message thread. If somebody has something to say about a car that they owned, then post a review of it, but don't hit every review of cars that you never owned and say "You are wrong about your personal experience, because J.D. Powers says..." You are wasting my time when I want to see what somebody experienced with a certain car. I can read J.D. Powers on my own, I don't need you to quote it to me!
I didn't quote J.D. powers, and I have owned a Ranger, so I speak from personal experience. I don't want to see people buy these trucks when they could own something better for the same price. If this site is a waste of your time, go elsewhere. And yes, that is how I evaluate information I believe to be bull***t. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely? About as likely as a Ranger making a trip to the moon.
Over exaggerating?
truck 1: 408,134 miles
truck 2: 398,667 miles
truck 3: 418,777 miles
truck 4: 436,801 miles
truck 5: 444,474 miles
truck 6: totalled as of yesterday
truck 7: 401,654 miles
truck 8: 421,186 miles
truck 9: 477,625 miles
truck 10: 408,612 miles
truck 11: 501,007 miles.
And yes, I'm sorry that you don't want to believe it, but my friends truck IS beat all to hell, as is mine. and I'm sorry I lied about the not being in the shop once thing, his truck went in because of a failed mass air flow sensor. that's it, all the problems. and I also stated that the fleet of trucks had VERY LITTLE problems, not NO PROBLEMS...
The oil on any engine, regardless of manufacturer, will start to turn black because of soot / combustion products: it will not stay clear between changes.
It will be interesting to look back on these comments in 5 years and see the frequency of repair rate that I have personally seen climb on imports since 2000. Frankly I look at what I have shelled out of late. Former laurels are all well and good, but I am seeing problems that I never had before. I spent money on clutches in the past on my imports, but not complete transmission losses. I had a water pump replaced on a recall at 30,000 miles. I know I cannot buy another new 1977 Celica GT or a new Acura Legend that I once had and were better made in my opinion than the imports available today. They were fun to drive and were reliable. I use to be one of those raving about how great Toyota and Honda were. When you get a couple major repair bills on a low mileage vehicle you were meticulous about it may give you a new outlook. And it could happen tommorow. Theres plenty of reviews with Toyota Lexus/Honda Acura problems on here by the way. If they were exceptional I would not have bought new domestics this year.
I am not talking about Civics or Cavaliers... I am referring to high end Lexus/Acura...they lost a wonderful customer. I traded every 2-3 years.