Thinking about picking up a 2000'ish 4 cylinder / 5 speed manual transmission equipped Ranger or Mazda B-series truck (I think they are mechanically identical). Any known problem areas on these trucks that I should keep my eyes open for? Also, I think the engine by this time was a 16 valve ... if this is indeed true, is that still a Ford plant, or Mazda sourced?
Thanks in advance !!
I think at one pointment, the 2.3 was a duratec unit.....I was wondering what a disi swap would be.
I also want to know these answers.
Those little turds run forever and cost nothing. My only complaint besides slow is the pedals are too close to each other. If you drive with work boots it's super easy to slam on the brakes when trying to push in the clutch.
Confirmed. 1998-2001 was a 2.5l, 2001 forward was a duratec. Go forth and make turbo trucks.
Rust. Everywhere. My brother had one. He bought it with about 60,000 miles on it, taught himself to drive a manual in it and it continued on to about 250,000 with only minor problems. It needed weight in the bed or it wouldn't move on snow. He loved it and would still have it if he didn't need space for two car seats but it was rusting from front to rear when he traded it in.
FWIW, all of the trucks were built in the US, which would mean the engines came from a US Ford plant.
They are identical to the Mazda ones, and I thought they were really good engines to work on. Easy to make really clean.
My work truck is a 2007 Ranger 4 cylinder autotragic. In white with an aluminum camper top. It's got a whopping 14,000 miles on it and will live forever at the rate I drive.
It's slow, and rattley. It shudders and jars over even mild imperfections in the road.
Summed up, it's cheap.
The 2000 would have a 2.5. My 1994 is a 2.3. Lima bean motor or whatever. 2001 up is the mazda motor. I think mine makes like 80 hp, and has a 3.45 axle. Redlines first gear at like 37 mph. But I actually enjoy driving it.
Joey
Only vehicle I regret selling was my 2007 5speed 3L regular cab regular bed...in 120k the most complicated job was front wheel bearings...and when I say cheap to keep running....I mean...cheap
You know my feelings on the 2.3/2.5L engine versus the MZR engines.
Spend the extra money and pick up a later truck. If the engine ever goes then put NC MX5 cams in a Ranger head and slap them on a 2.5L Fusion block and enjoy a boost in torque and horsepower
I have a 2005 (duratec) standard cab short bed manual truck. Got it 5 years ago with 110k miles, it's now at 196k miles. Biggest issues have been fuel pump ($300 and I had a friend help me lift the bed off to fix it) and a clutch. Total cost so far has been $.21/mile.
Definitely a bit rattly, but it is kinda fun to drive with the manual. I'll probably keep mine until it dies - cheap enough that I wouldn't get much selling it so might as well hold on to it 
Wall-e wrote: Rust. Everywhere. My brother had one. He bought it with about 60,000 miles on it, taught himself to drive a manual in it and it continued on to about 250,000 with only minor problems. It needed weight in the bed or it wouldn't move on snow. He loved it and would still have it if he didn't need space for two car seats but it was rusting from front to rear when he traded it in.
Check the leaf spring shackle and spring to frame mounting points for rust.
Are the brakes horrible in these or was the old spare work truck I had to drive last week just trashed? Brakes sucked, seat and steering wheel sucked bc it was the cheap strpiper model with no adjustments really, steering felt like crap. I hope it was just that particular truck was clapped out. I remember my dad's 88 being much nicer.
The brakes seemed fine to me. We both overloaded it many times when we moved and used it regularly to tow a 16ft boat.
I think most of it has been covered here. The biggest issues with the trucks themselves tend to be rusted out leaf spring hangers. The early 2.3L Duratec trucks have been known to have some cooling system issues, but it's not wide spread. Other than that, they're simple and super cheap to keep going.
The older Lima 2.3L and 2.5L engines (pre 01.5) are tried and true, but leave some performance and fuel economy on the table compared to the newer Duratec DOHC that started in mid 2001. Whatever you do, get the manual trans. It's not a great trans, but the auto sucks in every way and will rob performance and mpg.
My daily/winter truck is an 01 2.3L/5 spd and it's been steady as gravity. I typically get 30mpg, insurance is cheap, parts are plentiful should something go wrong, and it's easy to work on.
Thanks for all the input, folks! The search is on now ... and if I pull the trigger on this, it will absolutely be a manual transmission equipped model !!
einy wrote: Any known problem areas on these trucks that I should keep my eyes open for?
Yes, I think they had some kind of speed monitoring feature that wouldn't let the trucks go more than 10mph UNDER the posted speed limit. I swear that every time I'm stuck behind a slow moving car, it's a '90's '00's Ranger. If it's a one lane each way road, the damn thing refuses to budge above the speed limit. If it hits 1mph over, the vehicle automatically slams on the brakes. On the highway, it's pre-programmed to do 53mph in the left lane. I see this more in the Ranger than I do in a Buick Century or tan Camry. It's just ridiculous.
Beyond that, my knowledge of them is that they're rattle laden, crude, but never die.
In reply to Klayfish:
I would think that as an insurance guy, you'd appreciate when people obey traffic laws and drive conservatively. 
When did the front suspension switch? Is one better than the other. There was both a coil spring A-arm and a torsional spring version. http://www.therangerstation.com/tech_library/front_suspension.shtml
I bought an '88 new as a leftover. As barebones as could be. Only one I've seen in person with the 2.0 Lima. Mazda 5 speed.
That 2wd took more punishment than it ever deserved. Jumped it, flew down fire roads in the state forest, had it sideways every time it rained. The TIB front end was tough.
Funny how a kid could have NO problems getting around in New England winters with no weight in the back.
I replaced the bench seat with maroon velour buckets from a Buick.
If I could have one daily driver that did everything I asked of it, it'd be that truck.
RossD wrote: When did the front suspension switch? Is one better than the other. There was both a coil spring A-arm and a torsional spring version. http://www.therangerstation.com/tech_library/front_suspension.shtml
All Rangers were i-beams until 98. In 98 and later, most 2wd trucks were coil spring/sla, while 4wd trucks and select few 2wd trucks got torsion bars.
A friend had the old square bodied one, I can't remember the model year, probably early 90's. We beat that thing so hard. It was ramped so many times. It never broke. Just kept going.
I bought an 89' new. It was a 2.9L V6 5sp. Best vehicle I ever owned! The 2.9L had a rep of cracking heads but if you maintained the cooling system and didn't overheat it they were fine. I traded mine to my brother-in-law at 120K and his son then abused it for an additional 60K until he traded it in on a used Mustang. Other then normal stuff (brakes & exhaust, etc.) the truck required no special repairs. Oh there was the trans replacement, my nephew tried to show his friend that you can't put the trans into reverse at speed. In his case it did go into reverse and a blowned up tranny was the result.
Fun fact:
The rear end from a '97-01 5.0 powered Exploder/Mountaineer will bolt right up. But, the Ranger is SOA and the Exploder is SUA so the rear of the truck would drop 3 or 4 inches. Also shock mounts would need to be welded onto the frame. A small price to pay for a tough 8.8" ring and pinion and 31 spline axles.
You'll need to log in to post.
