Which of these two rangers..

[mtnrgr]

Would you buy? I have been looking for a good 93-94 ranger, a plain stock 2wd for awhile, and these 2 have my interest. At this time in my life I do believe I would be good with owning another 2.3 ranger., last I had was my 88 I owned from 89-98. These two are what I'm look for, especially three things, 60/40 seats, power steering, air conditioning. The blue one would have the tool boxes and rack removed as I would not need those. Give your honest opinions..

1994 Ford Ranger truck, RWD, 4cyl. 5spd. tool box/ rack, EXLNT...

JUST CAME IN! 1994 Ford Ranger XLT truck, rear wheel drive, 4cyl. 5speed manual, 237k, Metallic Blue/ grey cloth interior, A/C, premium sound CD, 15" factory alloy wheels w/ near new all season...

reno.craigslist.org

1994 FORD RANGER EXTRA CLEAN STICK SHIFT - cars & trucks - by dealer...

FAMILY TRUCK AND AUTO - 360 N. Yosemite Ave. in Oakdale, CA Year: 1994 Make: FORD Model: RANGER Trim: XL Exterior Color: WHITE Interior Color: TAN Mileage: 161849 Transmission: MANUAL Drivetrain:...

modesto.craigslist.org

 

[bobbywalter]

you need them both.

 

[RobbieD]

Tough call. I'd honestly have to look at both in person, and drive both, before making that decision.

The blue is half the asking price of the white one, for 66k mile difference. The blue has a 6-digit odometer, so there's a good chance that 237,600 miles is accurate. The white one doesn't show the odometer, but I've seen a lot more 5-digit than 6-digit odometers in he '94s.

The white one claims recent clutch, which is good. The blue may have had the timing belt replaced, as the cover is missing. I don't think the wheels on the blue one are original for a '94 (and being 15" on a 2.3L 2WD); they're likely later Ranger or Explorer wheels.

The white one's tan interior seems to be in better shape than the blue one (looks like the blue dash is cracked, too). On the blue one I also don't like the shifter knob, and replaced radio (sorry- suggests "non-adult driven", along with the wheel change and missing timing belt cover).

The white one definitely does look cleaner, with pluses being the original climate control "how to" sticker and a stock-looking radio (although the antenna is aftermarket- compare the two trucks). The steel wheels with dog dishes are nice and correct. The white one was perhaps a fleet truck or a private owner's occasional truck, and the bed looks good.

The blue one has a nice box and rack setup, but a lot of dings and wrinkles on the body if you look close.

I'd have to look at, and drive both. Check everything for what works, and what don't (especially the AC- $$$). How do they each drive, and feel? Look close (as in crawl under) for any fluid leaks.

All things considered, I'd rather get by with the lesser cost truck, but I would be glad to pay the extra if other one is in the exceptional condition like it looks to be.

For what it's worth, I consider the 1994 models as the most problem-free and dependable model years to that point.

 

[RonD]

Go with the XLT just because its an XLT and will have more options/wiring for options than the XL

1994 Ranger brochure here: https://www.therangerstation.com/resources/pdf_documents/1994_ford_ranger_brochure.pdf

I would actually look at 1996 or 1997 2.3ls, they have the EEC-V computers with OBD2 which can make diagnosing issues easier on older vehicles
1995 EEC-V could be finicky, wasn't true OBD2 yet

I would agree about 1994s, my 1994 4.0l 4x4 has been a darn good truck

 

[mtnrgr]

Thanks to all for your suggestions. Between the two I would take the white one for my preference. I had been around many 95-00 rangers, do like the interior. Thru the years I have heard about how things changed more with the gem module, changing the heater core, not fond of airbags , etc.

I know obd2 is alot more easier than obd1, I am still old school, I like simplicity in certain things. Owning a obd1 is like an 8 track and cassette tape mixture, trying to record using windows 95. I have always loved the 89-94 dash..the 94 ranger with the older style dash is a great look to me. When I am 94, still driving a 94 ranger, I can still see over the dash, where as 95+, you can't . The 94 ranger has been a favorite year of mine, the reason my 94 3.0 has 636,777 thousand miles.

Ron, what is the wiring difference between the xl and xlt?

 

[JoshT]

They're both 2wd 2.3L manual transmission. That's a bullet proof combination, so I think it just comes down to which you like better. Both listings have things that turn me off to them. Dealerships are normally scummy places, but name of the one where blue is at takes it to heart. Ken's-3-way sounds like a porno flick, I really don't want to search that dealership in fear of the results I may get. The white listing has a wall of key words that have nothing to do with the truck, and I can't stand that.

Although I am getting tired of the light gray in my 99, I like that blue and gray better than the tan and white combo. White is twice the price but it is clean! Blue is clean for a work truck, but it has definitely been worked. One thing that jumps out is a broke or missing timing belt cover on the blue truck, as well as the loose spark plug wires, missing throttle body cover, and something going on with wires or vacuum lines near the oil cap.

Ultimately I'd have to look at both and see which I like better. At a glance I'd probably go for the blue due to the lower price and color preference. The missing bits in the engine bay don't really matter, they probably need similar wear and tear maintance items, and I could do a lot of fixing and maintenance for that $3400.

Almost forgot, the blue one has cupholders. That's a big plus in my book as well.

 

[RobbieD]

I would actually look at 1996 or 1997 2.3ls, they have the EEC-V computers with OBD2 which can make diagnosing issues easier on older vehicles

I know obd2 is alot more easier than obd1, I am still old school, I like simplicity in certain things.

Believe it or not, I stopped buying new Rangers after my '94 because of adding airbags and going to OBD2 in the '95 models (between 1985 and 1994 I had six new Rangers). I still have the '94 Ranger, as a venerated yard ornament, but have added two 1994 Explorers to the fleet. 1994 was a GOOD year.

Yes, OBD2 has more capability, but OBD1 is just fine with a code reader AND the Ford Powertrain Control/Emissions Diagnosis manual. Especially if you're an old-timer and was raised on carburetor-and-points vehicles, where you to think through problems. The PCED manual makes a difference; OBD codes are somewhat model-specific, and just grabbing a generic list from the internet or reader instructions can have you chasing things which don't apply to your truck. A PCED for your model year outlines the exact trouble code parameters for it, and how to troubleshoot accordingly.

All things considered, on a 29 year old truck, unmolested good original condition overall is worth a premium in my book. There's still of lot of old Rangers that need some degree of repair or restoration, but well-kept nice originals are getting a hell of a lot harder to find.

They're both 2wd 2.3L manual transmission. That's a bullet proof combination,

Very true! Especially for the 1994 model year. Being the last year, it was the peak for EECIV and OBD1.

Almost forgot, the blue one has cupholders. That's a big plus in my book as well.

In my book, that's the passenger's job.

 

[19Walt93]

I wouldn't buy anything without seeing it in person and driving it. Any used vehicle is going to be 50/50 manufacturer/maintenance. The missing timing cover and nasty black brake fluid on the blue one don't inspire confidence in the maintenance history. The white one has a $.99 bolt on battery terminal that would have to go.

 

[JoshT]

In my book, that's the passenger's job.

That would require having a passenger, something that is fairly rare for me.

The white one has a $.99 bolt on battery terminal that would have to go.

What's wrong with 99 cent battery terminals? They do the job as well as the more expensive terminals as long as they're maintained properly.

 

[lil_Blue_Ford]

FWIW, a roll of duct tape on the transmission hump makes a fairly useable cup holder. As long as there’s a decent amount of tape on the roll, it won’t tip, especially if it’s an unwrapped new roll because it will stick to the floor and stay put.

My green Ranger I built a custom center console and built my own cup holders using 3” ABS pipe couplings. Those proved to be PERFECT! Very few cups and containers don’t fit. They will take anything from 12 ounce cans up to Gatorade bottles, the bigger ones from the gas stations. Huge upgrade over factory cup holders that fit a whole lot of nothing.

 

[RobbieD]

That would require having a passenger, something that is fairly rare for me.

Well, you could get one of those inflatable girlfriend dolls to hold your drink, and that would let you use the carpool lanes, too. Win-win!

 

[scotts90ranger]

I ended up with my '97 because I found it, my requirements for a new to me daily driver were extended cab, TIB, 5 speed 2.3L, kinda wanted a '92 for the body style and latest version of it (I prefer the second gen dash as well for heater core and simplicity sake) but when I saw this '97 for $450 that needed a new suspension beam and other minor stuff couldn't pass it up... twin disc calipers up front and OBD II are nice, would prefer the '89-94 dash since the heater core is restricted in both ways, 15 minutes would be nicer than 4 hours...'

I haven't looked at either but yeah, miles likely matter, the 2.3L has less reserve power so can get worn out quicker with some driving styles, at 200k my '97 runs pretty good but it's doing some odd things so likely needs the head rebuilt...

The cheap repair battery terminals suck because they clamp way worse than a crimped or soldered terminal, everyone uses the repair connectors because they are easy (I'm guilty as well, my '98 Explorer has one currently that I need to fix soon, just got the parts Friday...) but they corrode like mad since there's ALL the surface area, on my '00 Explorer it has one too I think but I'm pretty sure I tinned the wires first which is a few percent better... I have one on my '97 but just as an adapter since the junk sheet brass stock terminal corroded to the point it's just the welded on nut so I bolted that to one of those terminals... I know people hate lead but why did they go from reliable lead battery terminals to .020" brass? sure it's good for a few years but after that it's an EXTREME pain to fix reasonably...

 

[19Walt93]

That would require having a passenger, something that is fairly rare for me.



What's wrong with 99 cent battery terminals? They do the job as well as the more expensive terminals as long as they're maintained properly.

Those terminals are a pet peeve of mine, they look like crap and have more places for corrosion to grow. And they look like crap. I hate to see a show car with $1000 worth of billet bling bling and those terminals, it's right up there with a dash full of mismatched aftermarket gauges.

 

[JoshT]

I hate to see a show car with $1000 worth of billet bling bling and those terminals

I mean I could agree with you on the show car aspect, but we aren't talking about show cars here.

 

[scotts90ranger]

His other point on corrosion is more important than the show car thing, once corrosion starts it will migrate up the wire and get nothing but worse, stranded wire has LOTS of surface area for corrosion to start, and with the minimal compression force of those bandaid connectors there's room for it to propogate and grow and not transmit amperage... I changed the oil on my '97 today and apparently someone put one of those on the ground too, no corrosion yet but getting rid of those things is on the list...