The Ford Ranger today is so different than the one that preceded it. The old Ranger was truly a “small truck,” and its selling points were simple: The truck was cheap, reliable, easy to fix, decent on gas, compact, and yet still tough as nails. That was a formula for greatness, and, along with friendly styling, it established what may go down as America’s most lovable truck. I had a chance to drive a 2010 model — the second to last model year of the “small Ranger” — and I fell in love. Here’s why.
The truck shown in the video below had recently been traded in to Galpin Honda. I like to think it was owned by a hard-working American who bought the car new back in 2009 — they went into Galpin Ford and said: “I’d like your cheapest pickup truck, and make it an Automatic.” Then that construction worker rolled away proudly in a new, base-spec little Ranger with two-wheel drive, vinyl floors, a simple 2.3-liter four-cylinder engine, a bench seat, a six-foot bed, and not a whole lot else. Because, after all, this was a work truck.
Fast forward to 2024, and this imaginary construction worker is retiring, so he or she decides to buy something a little more comfortable and that can fit the grandkids. They snag a Honda CR-V Hybrid — loaded to the hilt — and trade in the ol’ workhorse, which, while driven hard over the years, has been well maintained.
This is where I come in. I begin the video by describing how small trucks are dead. “America decided small trucks are wack,” I say, before imploring you all to look up “dancing beds” to drive home a point about just how huge the small truck world once was. Here’s what I mean:
The “minitruck” era of the 1980s and 1990s is dead and gone, and that’s a shame, because inexpensive, compact utility is still something Americans value. I know this because, in the city of LA, old Ford Rangers still abound, with heavy loads often stacked way, way up high in their six-foot beds. In fact, throughout the Trade-In-Tuesday shoot, I saw a number of old Rangers working hard. Here’s one:
I even saw a new Ranger, which helped me illustrate just how large the new generation of the model has become:
It’s a shame, really, but hey, all cars have gotten bigger, and the Ranger at least stayed roughly the same size from 1983 to 2011 — that’s a hell of a run. Check out this first-gen:
Anyway, back to this trade-in. It featured a beautifully-running 2.3-liter “Duratec” inline-four (not to be confused with the truck above’s 2.3-liter Pinto engine). It’s the same “MZR” engine you’d find in a first-gen Mazda3 or Mazda6, and it’s known to be extremely durable. Also decently durable is the 5R44E five-speed automatic — from what I understand, the very first five-speed auto offered in a mainstream American vehicle. Here it sends power to just the leaf-sprung solid rear axle, while the coil-sprung double-wishbone front suspension has no halfshafts going through it to send power to the front wheels.
By the way, even though the Ranger I drove has a traditional coil-sprung independent front suspension, I once wrote an article describing the many interesting suspensions offered on Ford Rangers — from torsion bars to Twin Traction Beams to Twin I-beams. (Heck, I didn’t even mention the De Dion rear suspension on the electric Ford Ranger!). So definitely check that out.
Anyway, back to this traded-in truck. It had a nice drop-in bedliner for the six-foot bed, which six-foot-something cameraman Griffin tested out:
Here’s me talking about how fantastic the column-shifter is, and how all work trucks should have them since they take up space that is otherwise entirely unused. A floor shift, though, wastes valuable space.
Here’s me pointing out how great the vinyl floors are:
“None of this carpet stuff, come on! Where are we in the Taj Majal? … We need vinyl floors so that if my dog vomits, I can just spray it out with a hose. That’s what a work truck is all about,” I say in the video, apparently forgetting that the Taj Majal isn’t exactly known for its carpets. But you get the point.
I spend much of my drive enjoying a vehicle that, frankly, seems almost too nice given its age. The dash somehow was never cracked by the California sun, the seats are in decent condition, and the AC blows cubes. “This is a great trade-in. I think someone maybe got promoted,” I say in the video above. “They definitely didn’t need to turn this thing in. Its body is rock-solid, the brakes are good, the steering is good, the engine feels great. You could put this thing to work right now and it would do great.”
I love how small and maneuverable the truck is, I think the power steering and brakes feel more than adequate, the ride quality isn’t bad, visibility is great, and while, sure, the cab may be a little cramped for some, for me it was just fine.
Even though it became known as “Ranger Danger” in Michigan, where it had a tendency to rust out, the little Ranger won me over. Sure, I didn’t exactly load it up or drive it on the highway, where that four-cylinder might have felt a little sluggish, but 143 horsepower, 154 lb-ft for a truck that weighs probably 3,100 pounds — it’s not that bad! Unladen and around town, it didn’t even feel slightly underpowered.
Continue watching the video, and you’ll see that much of it involves me being distracted by…this:
I stop the Ranger and interview the builder, who uses random scrapmetal to basically Mad Max-ify his Chevy Silverado. Those “fangs” are made of a cut-down, sharpened ring (of sorts) from a washing machine. The truck is absolutely bonkers.
Part of me wanted to put in an offer for that Ranger. I bet I could have snagged that for just a few grand, and it would have been an absolute workhorse for all my wrenching exploits. Alas, I’m no longer in the business of buying automatic transmission ICE vehicles, even if I do love a column shift.
I’d love to get one of these Rangers for weekend homeowner stuff. Regular cab, six foot bed is perfect. It doesn’t need to be comfortable, I’m going to the lumber yard or garden center with it.
But man, the used market has these priced almost like Tacomas and full-size trucks. Saw a low mile (90k) one for $15k!!
I had a ’93. Loved it but got rid of it because the seats were the absolute worst and most uncomfortable ones that I ever sat in. No aftermarket do-dads would help.
Yep, terrible seats. I kept meaning to swap my bench seat with buckets from an Explorer but never got around to it.
2nd-3rd gen Rangers are the American Toyota Hilux: two-door stripper pickup that comes in white and Just Works.
In about 2005 ± I bought a ‘98 Ranger from a workmate. It was an extra cab, (no rear doors), step side, 4.0 pushrod V6, 4 spd auto, 4WD, w/ carpets!… and cracked cylinder heads. My wife was quaking in fear for what I brought home for $1000. When she saw it come off the tow truck, she immediately laid claim to it.
I bought a wrecking (excuse me, recycling) yard 4.0 and installed it that weekend. Monday she and our son set off from the Bay Area to LA for a project. It performed just fine and she drove it another 50-60k miles. It seemed that about every 20-30k miles I had to put a set of spark plugs in it, but was otherwise ok. It did amaze me how Ford managed to get only 160hp out of a 4.0 w/ fuel injection.
It did falter when we went to Lake Tahoe one winter. It used a vacuum pulse system to lock the front hubs and when in the freezing weather of Tahoe, it seems that some errant water in the vacuum line to the hubs froze and cut off the vacuum. No 4wd. Fortunately, I had bought chains for the trip and was able to make it over Echo Pass w/ no trouble.
I completely agree. I had a ’93 ranger with the 2.3 and pretty much drove it around absolutley wringing it out constantly. My girlfriend at the time suggested we look at a newer one, and I test drove a ranger that had the 4.0 thinking almost double the volume should be significantly more powerful. It felt…exactly the same. I thought at the time, would someone actually walk up and say “The 2.3 is good but do you have one that makes just a couple more horsepower with much worse gas milage?”
New series: DT pointing at things
I’ve had an 85, 2.9 5 speed 4wd. Bought in 96, lasted until 99. Oil blow over, sold before the engine blew. Bought a 93 STX, reg cab, bucket seats, console, 4.0, 4wd, 5 speed manual. That just got scrapped 1 year ago with almost 420,000 miles on it! I now have a 98 Mazda B-4ord Ranger (Danger Ranger, hence my username). Extended cab, 4.0 5 speed, 4wd with 223,000 and it’s my forever truck. I have 2 other vehicles right now, but that truck will be here until it rots away. It’s paid for, I can fix almost everything that breaks, the A/C works. There is a lot to be said about a Mother F*ckin FORD RANGER!
My family always had the Mazda B4000s in rotation due to my dad’s work. After they stopped making them, we picked up a 96 Ranger with the 4.0 4×4 extended cab. I drove the to college and several years after. We bought it with 160k I think and my dad ended up trading it in just last year after having it for a decade and closing in on 300k. Did a bunch of work as just preventative maintenance but thing was great.
I would totally get another but they are expensive now and I have an 08 Tacoma. The short bed sucks when it comes to hauling anything significant. I miss the 6 foot bed that would fit our Yamaha Warrior ATV’s perfectly. Didn’t even need to strap that suckers down
Had to laugh at DT trying to unlock the door. Classic Ranger problem (I’ve run wire rope from the locking mechanism, crimped into a loop that hides under the handle on more than one).
How’s the center console looking (mostly disintegrating into nothingness unless replaced by a homemade plywood box)?
Beyond those inevitable problems she’s good to go.
What’s a square yard of mushroom compost dropped from a front end loader weigh?
Enough to make the mud flaps scratch the blacktop at every bump in the road.
Can it haul an MX6 on a tow dolly up a steep gravel driveway?
Eventually, given a good running start.
Can it get you and your buddy from Oklahoma City to Seattle, towing everything the two of you own in a U-Haul trailer?
In late December?
Sure will. I wouldn’t recommend that though
(I probably wore a few years off my teeth going through Wyoming in a snow storm that night).
Can it get you to and from work, worry free for years and years?
Does it allow you to stop and pick up discarded yet repairable furniture or whatever on a whim?
Does it let you dispose of unnecessary items or whatever on a similar whim?
Can you sit on the toolbox in the bed, grab a cold beverage out of a cooler and lean back against the cab while music plays through the split open window behind you as you stare up at fireworks or whatever stars happen to be glowing bright above America that particular cool summer night? On the bank of a river somewhere. Lazily holding hands with someone you love.
To the moon and halfway back.
GOD DAMN SLAVE CYLINDER again!
I miss that truck.
Any truck that’ll get you out of OKC is a good truck. Sounds like you got a LOT of extra goodness, thank you for the sweet story.
True.
Moved to OKC because of a girl. When she left me, she took the dog and the house. All I got was the truck.
It was then I realized I was living in a country song and had to GTFO!
I’ve only had my 97 2.3 5sp extra cab crank window for about 4 years now, and it is a great little truck. It recently passed 251,000 on the original engine and tranny.
It does everything I’ve asked it to, gets mid 20s on the freeway, no issues at all with ignition and fuel delivery.
Hauling 800 lbs of gravel, it barely felt it, lots of low end from that 2.3.and it will cruise 70 in 5th gear on level ground all day and still have a bit left over.
And I can haul a washer and dryer upright in my 6 foot bed, the space between the wheel wells makes a 40 x 73 inch flat load floor.
Cosmetically it needs help, but I’ll probably trade up before I paint it. I’m looking for a ’98 or later extra cab with the openable back doors and a 3.0 with automatic transmission.
Almost exactly one year ago, I snagged an ’06 from a guy getting divorced. In good shape in some places. The driver’s rocker and some spots on the frame were not those places.
Just picked it back up this evening after the airbag recall. Swapped a better bed on, found a bed slider/cap/bedliner from a guy for less than $400. Gotta finish the rust repair and then she’s done.
Super happy to snag one for so cheap.
This seems like successor to my neighbor’s truck which was a 96-97 short bed with automatic but no AC. I think was originally a meter reader’s truck. I want to check out my son’s 2005 he picked up cheap. I think it has AC, and it needed a salvage yard transmission but it was still only about $3000 all in for a runabout.
After watching the video, I have a few thoughts;
I dig the street spotting idea.
Sounds good. Same model, different year or similar to whatever’s in the Galpin trade in lot, and other interesting one offs for perspective
Current 2011 Ranger owner here. (Extended cab, 4.0 SOHC V-6, 2wd, Automatic) I will say that the Ranger works very well in it’s class.
The 1,120-pound payload is pretty low to me (Even worse when it’s on a full size truck!) I threw on a set of helper springs set to the highest weight rating. Even with those, a half yard of sand will put it on the “bump stops”.
The tow rating is decent at 5,500 pounds but good luck getting Home Depot or Sunbelt to rent you anything larger than a stump grinder. Want a 25 foot JLG lift/cherry picker, a small tractor, or a backhoe and you are out of luck. They will not hook those up to your Ranger.
It will happily haul 30 bags of mulch at a time. Landscape bricks sit well and you can slide 10 foot sections of 3/4 pcv piping through the back window and it will fit in the bed. You will have to keep the tailgate down if you are loading both a washer and dryer in the bed.
Speed is adequate and mileage is good enough.
There is an aluminum aftermarket thermostat housing to replace the stupidly engineered laminated plastic one and yes, the 4.0 has the damn timing chains so I change my oil at 3,000 miles for peace of mind.
If you are lucky enough to have the torsion bar setup, changing shocks is a breeze!
Yup, the shocks have a couple of bolts and they drop right out. Plus like all things ranger, replacements are comically cheap.
I had 2 02’s, loved em. The perfect truck.
Fun fact: 2wd trucks usually had the coil springs on the front. Torsion bars were on 4wd or 2wd Edge trucks ONLY. The Edge package trucks were basically 4wd trucks without the 4wd running gear in the front…
Damn, that’s a good one. My personal opinion is that the best Rangers are the 2nd gens because they still had the twin I-beam suspension, but the 3rd gens ain’t bad. My ‘97 is a 3.0/auto but otherwise is as basic as it comes. The vinyl floor is great, and like yours the AC is excellent. Love that truck! My FIL’s Ranger is a ‘94 with 294k miles on the Pinto engine, and it’s amazingly nice to drive.
Our ’03 Mazda B2300 with 5-speed was regularly tasked with jobs most Americans would buy a F150 for. It never stranded us or failed to achieve the tasks we put it to. We towed a 2000lb trailer with 3000lbs of TR6, books and vinyl across the country with it. We sold it a couple years ago to buy an ’05 Sierra with a 4.8 LS for additional tow duties and I’ve not yet justified the swap.
https://imgur.com/gallery/mazda-b2300-tows-triumph-tr6-CQlJDm9
That had to be an interesting trip.
Sad trombone. I’m sure it will find a good owner. (It would be good to get a Galpin link to the truck.)
Had a 93 ranger 3.0 stick 7ft bed
Eas a quick lil dude for what it was, but rust took the rear hangars out.
Otherwise, probably one of the cleanest Rangers in indiana for a time.
Pity the headgaskets blew and didn’t feel like messing with it.
Shoulda 5.0 swapped or tdi swapped it
“I know this because, in the city of LA, old Ford Rangers still abound, with heavy loads often stacked way, way up high in their six-foot beds”
Reminds me of the poor motos in Asia:
overloaded motorcycle at DuckDuckGo
Bring back small trucks! Also that Silverado sweet Christmas…it’s like he read about how dangerous new trucks are too pedestrians and thought, “I can be MORE dangerous!”
Galpin should just keep that as an errand truck.
Rangers are like a good dog. Faithful, obedient, knows you better than you know yourself, laid back but functional when needed, doesn’t stress out, and you can’t really get too mad at it when it gets old and makes a mess on the old rug every once in a while.
My brother has a yellow 2007 with the 3.0L, and it’s great. Even has a matching cap over the bed. Wish it had 4WD (so he could use boat ramps instead of his work truck), but for the price and condition, and used as an errand truck it’s great. He’s taken a Jeremy Clarkson-like zeal and delight in fixing little things wrong with it. He even did a camshaft sensor the other day all by himself.
I love the “original” Rangers, but I will admit by the mid 90s, Ford was starting to lose the plot with them.
One big issue is that Ford did not have a competent 4-cylinder engine to put in them until way too late. Their 2.3L SOHC engine only made 112HP/135 lb-ft. This was pretty bad in 2wd trim, and just abysmal in heavier 4wd trucks. By ’97, Ford just completely discontinued 4WD 4-Cylinder Rangers because of low take rate. In comparison, the 4WD Tacoma’s 2.7L DOHC engine made 150HP/177 lb-ft. Ford finally ditched the old Pinto engine in favor of the Mazda/Ford DOHC 2.3L engine in ’01, but they never brought back the 4 cylinder/4wd variant.
So if you wanted 4WD, you had to get either the 3.0 V6 (which got mediocre fuel economy, and offered essentially identical power to the 4-cylinder) or the 4.0 SOHC V6 which got terrible fuel economy, was terribly unreliable, and offered less power than just about every contemporary V6 engine. On top of that, the 5R44/55E transmission had a really tall 1st gear. So these trucks always felt kind of doggy to drive, and never really got great fuel economy.
The 2.3L DOHC/5-Speed manual trucks are really sweet. They get fantastic fuel economy, and feel reasonably lively on the street. But of course, 2WD only.
While the 4.0L SOHC wasn’t great at fuel economy, it was reasonably reliable (I’ve owned five, and still have one today) and on par power wise with almost all contemporary V6s of the time as well as Ford’s own 5.0L V8 in the trucks (the 2000 Explorer had the 4.0L at 208hp and the 5.0L at 210hp). The 4.0L OHV you could get in the Ranger until 2000 was a dog (had one of them too) with only 140-160hp (depending upon year) with V8 fuel economy, but it at least didn’t feature the silly front and rear timing chain setup the 4.0L SOHC had.
The 4.0 SOHC was okay during the last few model years, reliability wise. After the numerous TSBs and recalls on the timing system. Even then, many later model 4.0s still suffer from timing issues eventually.
The 4.0 SOHC making similar power to the 5.0 V8 is more a condemnation of Ford’s V8 than anything. The 4.0 SOHC was “competitive” when it was introduced in ’97 with 207HP. Toyota’s smaller 3.4L V6 generated 190HP, and the Frontier’s smaller yet 3.3L engine around 180HP. However by ’05, both Toyota and Nissan were offering ~250-260 HP V6 engines. The 4.0 SOHC was way behind.
Although the 3.0 had similar power figures on paper, they were a ton smoother and their torque/power came at a lower RPM than the 2.3/2.5 fourbangers. My personal experience is that the fourbanger is tolerable with a stick but kinda miserable with an auto, while the 3.slow is acceptable with either.
The 2.3/2.5L “Pinto” engines were only about 115HP and very rough/crude, while the 3.0 V6 was around 145-150HP. So there’s a definite advantage there.
The later Mazda/Duratec 2.3L DOHC 4-cylinder was much more refined, and made around 142HP.
I own a Ranger Danger here in Michigan, rust is getting into the doors at the bottom and some sections underneath, but god I love that truck. 2009 Ranger XL extended cab 4.0L with no AC, manual everything including the transmission, vinyl floor. So easy to clean, my kids love the small backseats, the same experience I had when I was kid on my dad 91 GMC Sonoma.
It needs some suspension work soon but doing routine maintenance is so easy. 120k trouble free miles.
Very awesome. Get the thing Krown rustproofed!
I replaced my 99 Ranger with a 23 Maverick. I really like my Maverick, but it does NOT have the same charm as the old Ranger. I wish I never would have sold it…
I wondered what it would be like moving from a Ranger to a Maverick. The Maverick has it’s own charm, but nothing like the old little Rangers.
The first car I purchased after getting a “real” job was a used 1986 Ford Ranger with the 2.0 liter 4 cylinder 2 wheel drive, and a 5 speed manual transmission. I don’t think it had any options. Vinyl mats and bench seat, manual windows, regular cab and bed, and no air conditioning. It was very reliable except for when the timing belt snapped, but since it was not an interference engine I was able to put a new belt on and get it running again in no time. It was super slow and scary in the snow but good basic transportation for a young guy fresh out of college without much $$.
That was my first car! 1988 Ranger “S” – the S meant nothing standard. No power steering, no power breaks, no air, no radio, vinyl floor and bench seat. Dash was half steel, had A-pillar garnishes but no headliner. It was basic transportation that everyone says they want but no one will ever buy! The 2.0 was carbureted and had 80ish HP new. Couldn’t maintain 70 on a highway with a breeze. But I learned a lot from it.
Minitrucks are an odd proposition for manufacturers… people want them because they are small, but they also expect a massive reduction in price which doesn’t actually exist. There isn’t a huge price difference from making a new Ranger vs a new F150 except features. Steel (or Aluminum) ain’t that expensive! Our society values the bigger more, so they are more expensive.
they also expect a massive reduction in price which doesn’t actually exist. There isn’t a huge price difference from making a new Ranger vs a new F150 except features. Steel (or Aluminum) ain’t that expensive!
Conversely that also means a F150 doesn’t cost Ford much more to manufacture than a new Ranger. So the problem isn’t that those pesky people expect massive reductions in price (after all Ford was still making a profit on minitrucks) but that people are wiling to throw stupid amounts of financed money at Ford for something bigger.
Po-tay-to Po-tah-to
Unfortunately the American consumer is conditioned to want bigger/better at every turn and every generation. Until people start buying midsize over full size or walking away from off road trims in large numbers, the race to brodozer will continue.
Good news!
Midsize SUVs up until recently were the #1 product category so people were already buying midsize over full size. Now thanks to high prices and high payments they seem to be shifting to compact SUVs which I think have fewer off road trims:
““There does appear to be a shift towards smaller. So we’re seeing that, for example, midsize SUVs, which used to be the No. 1 product category, we’re seeing market shares now declining,” Chesbrough said.
Compact SUVs and compact sedans are cheaper than the bigger models — somewhat cheaper, at least.”
https://www.marketplace.org/2024/07/23/why-are-car-sales-still-strong-even-with-high-prices-and-interest-rates/
What is this Jeep Ranger XLT about which you write? I’ve not heard of that model from Jeep before. I’m very confused by the Top Shot. 😉