Neil said:
Critterhunter said:
My prior Ranger had a 2.3l 4 banger and got about 27 to 33 MPG depending on driving. I really didn't want a V6 in this one but it's almost impossible to find the supercab with the 4 banger in it. They also sell this Ranger with a 4.0 V6, which I think is insane based on how much power this truck already has with the 3.0 V6. I'm averaging about 23.5 MPG which isn't bad but that isn't great either.
I still have to change the plugs (double platnums) and I'm also going to change the oxygen sensors (THREE on this thing!). Both deals can hurt your gas milage. Many people think an O2 sensor is fine so long as the check engine light isn't on. They work in a "window" of normal parameters so if it's at the very edge of this window (just to the point of almost being bad and flagging the engine light) your milage can suffer.
I cleaned the throttle body (a must for milage/power) and the MAF sensor, but still need to pull off the IAC and EGR Valve/Air Tube to clean those as well. I know from experience that those things should be cleaned about once a year and you'll find a ton of carbon in them. About the only other thing I still need to change as well would be the fuel filter.
Fluids are the life blood. If you don't want to bleed the brakes/power steering then at least use a turkey baster to suck out as much fluid from them as possible and replace with synthetic. After a week or so do this again. After doing this several times over say a month you'll have pretty much new fluid in the entire system for them. Once you've had to change a leaking power steering pitman arm gasket or a brake caliper due to old brake fluid (and a good chunk of brake line) you'll find a few minutes doing the above once a year to be quick and easy preventive health.
thats good mpg but Ive had the 2.3L in a ranger years ago and its a doggy motor, compared to say the toyota 2.4 or nissan 2.3. Im not a fan of one car company. Ive had a couple of fords towed out of my yard that have failed but would buy one again if I liked them. I dont care for their light truck line but the F250s and up are sweet. I actually looked at a few used rangers with the six cylinders but couldnt find a correct price/condition so I got the GMC. my first GMC this is. I have had a few chevys and dodges and they all seem about the same to me. Im just hoping she holds up well for awhile. best of luck with your ranger, sounds like you got a great deal on it. your right too, the 4 door setup is sweet.
Im still looking for a used but not abused 4x4 that is small enough for fire roads, most have been lifted and I dont want that. I might look into a jeep, never had one of those.something in the $5k range.
When I was in the market for a brand new truck in 94 I was looking at the S-10 for a while. What really turned me off was every brand new one I looked at already had surface rust in the bed at the spot welds! I'm talking again about brand new trucks here that were already rusting through the paint inside the bed. Said no way to that. Early 90's Rangers (don't know if they still do?) have a large portion of the lower sheet metal on them made out of galvanized steel. Around 2000 I was T-Boned in the back wheel well and not only did that bang up the sheet metal but it took off a lot of paint. I pocketed the insurance money and never fixed it. Flash forward 8 years and no rust on exposed metal, just minor surface rusty color but nothing eating into metal. I finally got off my lazy bum and fiberglassed the damage.
The 2.3L is right up there with the Dodge Slant 6 of yester-year in terms of longevity. I know of guys who have 600 or 700 thousand miles on that motor and still not burning oil. Ford has made that motor for years and it's for the most part bullet proof. Same deal with the Ranger. That basic frame/body/drive train has been around since I think 1983, which means they've worked out the bugs. Really only the cosmetics, interior, and of course technology has changed on that truck in the version that exists to this day. As they always say, never buy a new vehicle design in it's first two or three years of production until it's been worked out with it's problems.
Anyway, depends on which 2.3L you got as far as power goes. My 94 had 8 plugs (2 per cylinder). Not a power horse but not bad, but then again I had a five speed clutch. I think the very next year or so they upped the horsepower a bit on it as well, and then went to the same motor but enlarged to a 2.7L for a few years. Now'a days I think it's back to being a 2.3L, probably because they improved the power through other means other than just enlarging the motor.
I always told people who thought foreign cars had better motors (remember, I said "thought") that it does you no good when the body is gone due to rust. I'd say since about the early 90's American cars are just as reliable and more so in certain respects. Even so, look at it this way...Even if a certain foreign car was say 2 times more reliable it's going to cost you 3 times the price for a part for it. I had a Probe with a Mazda engine in it and the alternator was $300! Remember, I'm talking about just the part. I do all my own work. An alternator for my 2.3l Ranger was somewhere in the $30 to $60 range. So long as you take care of a vehicle American cars are just as reliable as the ones from over seas, and even more so when it comes to salt on the roads (rust) and so on.
For a small 4x4 I'd look into the Chevy Tracker (they make them these days and I'm not talking about the old Geo Tracker of yester year that would blow it's motor in no time). I think Suzuki (?) also makes a version of this little "SUV" called the XS-5 or some other weird letter/number deal. Anyway, I've been told (but haven't checked) that this little SUV has held up to more abuse than any other SUV in some kind of contest they put all the latest models through. I heard something like that it's won that contest for several years in a row where they just beat on them. You'd have to check into it further to confirm this. Anyway, it's also the cheapest and smallest SUV (or very near the smallest, but for sure the cheapest I think) on the market these days. If you want something small that isn't going to break down on you then I'd confirm all this and look into one of those. I think they can be had for like $3000 to $6000 for a year 2000 and newer.
Here's my Toyota Commercial Idea....You know that one where the guys are shaking hands with customers who decided to come back and trust them? I figured why not show Toyotas in the background busting through windows and walls and taking off into the distance out of control while the Salesman tries to ignore it and talk to the customer. That would make a great Saturday Night Live Skit. What people don't realize is that the sticking gas pedal is just one of the problems. Some independent researchers believe there is also an electrical problem where the computer freezes up due to RF noise. Even driving under a power line might cause it. Also, for those who don't understand...MANY cars have both a physical throttle cable and a computer sensor on the throttle body (TPS- Throttle Position Sensor, which is pretty much a POT or variable resistor). What this means is that you've either got a sticking throttle cable or the TPS can develope a dead spot and think the throttle (butterfly) is at full. TPS tells the computer that the peddle is at full (when it's not) and the computer starts dumping more fuel to the injectors. Really the butterfly (throttle cable) might only control air flow in the throttle body these days and not the fuel flow so far as I know. Bottom line- sticking gas pedal? Yes, that's a problem on the Toyota, but it looks like even if that's not happening the computer is wigging out in many cases. I know I'd be covering the entire computer system with RF shielding myself until Toyota mans up to the problem and fixes it.
