I have an itch for a small truck for some reason and i have been looking at 01+ duratec rangers. Any major problems with them?
I have an itch for a small truck for some reason and i have been looking at 01+ duratec rangers. Any major problems with them?
Redesigned front suspension with rack and pinion steering. Surprisingly good fuel economy with decent power. I've read a lot of good things about them. Also I was actively shopping for one when I snagged a neighbor's XJ Cherokee.
Lol
Similar question, how’s the engine for tuning? Is this the same 2.3 from decades ago? And how well can it handle?
In reply to Trackmouse :
No its the same 2.3 that you could get in the 1st gen Focus ST aka tons of tuning options and there are turbo kits out there for it. Thats why I am asking 01+. The old ones had the 2.3 lima.
edit also. A Cosworth tuned version of this engine is found in the BAC Mono producing 285 bhp (213 kW; 289 PS) and 206 lb-ft (279 N-m)of torque
The company I work for has a fleet of base model Rangers used for parts delivery (I'm an auto parts delivery critter).
The trucks are all 2010s, 4 cyl, 5 speed, 2wd, base XLs.
The 2.3L Duratec is a tough little engine. According to Wikipedia, the one you want is 2003 and up. They made 143hp and 154lb ft. I don't really know what kind of fuel economy our trucks get since they always get filled up at 3/4s of a tank but a WAG is 22-24mpg.
The 5 speed is a Mazda unit, the M50D-R1. I have noticed that our trucks shift like crap. The shifter is very "crunchy" and extremely hard to get into gear when stopped. I believe the shifter bushings need to be replaced as these trucks all have right around 100k miles and were driven by people with little mechanical sympathy.
I have always been a Ranger fan. I had a 91 a decade ago with a bazillion miles on it. It was a great little truck. I wish I could find a newer one for a decent price.
My unicorn would be a 4cyl, 5 speed, 4wd, single cab. They made like 2 of them 
.
EDIT: Oh and as far as issues, we had a truck die due to a failed MAF. They are pretty bulletproof, just regular oil changes and consumables. We had one truck kill a steering rack but I think the truck met a curb before I worked there. The fleet manager is a known cheap ass so the trucks receive just enough attention to stay running. Tires? Maybe next year LOL
My son has one because he needed a daily and got a really clean, low mileage 09 from a relative for the right price. It's good on gas. He has nothing else good to say about it.
A similar year Colorado is light years ahead of a Ranger and a far better choice.
I prefer the older bodystyle but they were about the last small truck unlike the bloated colorado and dakota. No huge issues with them and we see alot of them in fleet acounts at work.
I believe the Ranger and Colorado are within a few inches on just about every dimension, and I think the wheelbase is the same.
yea they are all similar size and weight wise. except the 1st gen Tacoma weighs 2750 while the rest are at 3000-3100.
MrChaos said:In reply to Trackmouse :
No its the same 2.3 that you could get in the 1st gen Focus ST aka tons of tuning options and there are turbo kits out there for it. Thats why I am asking 01+. The old ones had the 2.3 lima.
edit also. A Cosworth tuned version of this engine is found in the BAC Mono producing 285 bhp (213 kW; 289 PS) and 206 lb-ft (279 N-m)of torque
The basic engine has a lot of performance potential, but the aftermarket for Ranger parts is pretty small. You can do head upgrades, cam swaps, underdrive pulleys, and things that carry over from other versions of this engine. MSDS makes a header, but it looks like the factory exhaust manifold is really nice for a cast piece. K&N sells an intake kit for 01-03 trucks. You can do OBD tunes, and that's about it. No forced induction kits will work off the shelf. Your best bet for boost might be the NC Miata supercharger that Flyin Miata sells, but it hasn't been attempted that I've seen. Otherwise you'd have to do something custom like a remote turbo setup.
Other than the relatively paltry aftermarket for the engine, they're great. My 01 gets 30mpg, is cheap to insure, and parts are readily available and low cost. I would consider a manual transmission to be required honestly. The auto equipped trucks get 24-25mpg max in most cases (thanks to old, inefficient trans design and 4.10 rear gears) and generally suck to drive.
A bit of a drop, a rear sway bar, a Hurst shifter, and some sticky tires and you'd have a surprisingly peppy little truck that could knock down 30mpg, make corners fun, and still haul your friend's junk on moving day.
Do these use the same Mazda sourced trans as the older Lima engine trucks? My '91 had a Mazda trans known for rubber plugs in the upper bellhousing that would shrink when they aged allowing the fluid (ATF) to leak out over time eventually grenading the trans. They are easy to replace. Leakage looks like the tail shaft housing gasket is leaking. But it isn't.
Hopefully the newer trucks no longer have this 'design'.
I wouldn't buy a 2.3 Lima Ranger. Total dog. Why I sold mine after a year.
I have an 01 2.3 manual. I picked it up last November with 74,000 on it for 2400 bucks. Not bad, but the clutch slave failed, required the trans to be pulled. Had them do a clutch as well. The variable intake flapper valve thingy (technical term) was bad, and I ended up replacing the intake and control actuator. The blend valve doodad broke apart for the heater core, and the coil pack failed. I had to do ball joints and shocks, and I used Monroe shocks that all make noise now.
It sounds worse than it is though. I think a lot of it’s issues were that a little old man owned it, and didn’t drive it much, but when he did he abused it. He passed away but the truck still lives, so take that for what it’s worth.
I would go for 03+ to avoid the intake issues, and the few extra hp. I regularly get high 20s for mileage, which I think is awesome for any truck.
Oh and a leaf spring mount rusted off. Strange for a relatively clean truck.
In reply to ddavidv :
IIRC, all of the 4cyl variants used the Mazda transmission, maybe the V6s as well.
I had a '91 2.3L 2wd 5 speed. I don't think I ever saw 20mpg. 88hp has to work pretty hard moving a brick while trying to not get run over haha.
Pictured with "winter traction control":
I like this:
I wish mini trucks would make a comeback
ZombyCougar Woofencamp said:My son has one because he needed a daily and got a really clean, low mileage 09 from a relative for the right price. It's good on gas. He has nothing else good to say about it.
A similar year Colorado is light years ahead of a Ranger and a far better choice.
Around here, they are light years different in price, too. Like almost double in nearly the exact same condition.
Too be fair my list currently goes. 1. Nissan Hardbody with a KA, 2. 2rz 1st gen Tacoma, 3. Anything else.
joey48442 said:I have an 01 2.3 manual. I picked it up last November with 74,000 on it for 2400 bucks. Not bad, but the clutch slave failed, required the trans to be pulled. Had them do a clutch as well. The variable intake flapper valve thingy (technical term) was bad, and I ended up replacing the intake and control actuator. The blend valve doodad broke apart for the heater core, and the coil pack failed. I had to do ball joints and shocks, and I used Monroe shocks that all make noise now.
It sounds worse than it is though. I think a lot of it’s issues were that a little old man owned it, and didn’t drive it much, but when he did he abused it. He passed away but the truck still lives, so take that for what it’s worth.
I would go for 03+ to avoid the intake issues, and the few extra hp. I regularly get high 20s for mileage, which I think is awesome for any truck.
Oh and a leaf spring mount rusted off. Strange for a relatively clean truck.
sounds like you bought my late grandfather's old ranger.
Apple Cougar Mellonseed said:ZombyCougar Woofencamp said:My son has one because he needed a daily and got a really clean, low mileage 09 from a relative for the right price. It's good on gas. He has nothing else good to say about it.
A similar year Colorado is light years ahead of a Ranger and a far better choice.
Around here, they are light years different in price, too. Like almost double in nearly the exact same condition.
For a reason.
MrChaos said:I have an itch for a small truck for some reason and i have been looking at 01+ duratec rangers. Any major problems with them?
That is one good looking truck there. 
I always liked the mid 90s Splash Edition reg cab Ranger with the flareside bed. There is one for sale that is red around the corner from work. Must keep driving...
In reply to ZombyCougar Woofencamp :
No doubt.
ZombyCougar Woofencamp said:Apple Cougar Mellonseed said:ZombyCougar Woofencamp said:My son has one because he needed a daily and got a really clean, low mileage 09 from a relative for the right price. It's good on gas. He has nothing else good to say about it.
A similar year Colorado is light years ahead of a Ranger and a far better choice.
Around here, they are light years different in price, too. Like almost double in nearly the exact same condition.
For a reason.
Colorado’s are horrible. Unless you’re buying one to V8. The ext cab swing door is a leaky, flimsy, nvh nightmare. The take off the hub to unbolt the rotor is a wtf moment. Don’t get me started on the 6lugs....
And still light years ahead of the Ranger.
ZombyCougar Woofencamp said:And still light years ahead of the Ranger.
Your opinion.
A friend put a 2.3 Ranger motor in his Locost. with some help it makes about 200 HP at the wheels. light enough to cary. Can't speak for the rest of the vehicle, but I love the motor.
Seems every time I get behind one it is slow. Maybe it is just the driver.
You'll need to log in to post.
