keep the ranger or buy something else

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Feb 3, 2011
Messages
1,426
Location
Golden Meadow, LA
My Ranger got hit at a stop sign last week, the other truck (F250) was only going about 10 mph, my truck is still completely driveable, the back bumper is slightly bent, tailight is cracked and the fender has a small dent.(all on the driver side) I'd like to sell the Ranger for $1500(it only has 136k miles so I think $1500 is fair) and buy something a little bit bigger. Ill be driving 500 miles a week to school starting in January, I'm torn between getting something fuel efficient versus something that will last even after done with school. So far Ive been looking at a 1988 F150 with the 300 straight six, standard, i know not the best on gas but pretty [censored] durable. It has two gas tanks one doesnt work but the guy said it runs great and hes asking $1700. Im also looking at a 2003 F150 with the 4.2 V6, standard, for $3000. they are both single cabs. I am also considering a Toyota Corolla, id prefer a standard if possible. Lets hear your opinions.
 
Last edited:
I'm a ford guy but for what you're saying, I would probably go with a Corolla. Also search for Chevy Prizm. Built by Toyota, badged for Chevy. I've had a couple 99 prizms and had to be the most reliable cars I've had. One had to have a new cat at 210k miles and the other had a leak in the ac compressor. I never fixed the ac compressor on that one though. Also had 93, 95, and 97 corollas. Very reliable (but boring) haha. More fun with stick shift and better mpg. There's a reason the first new car I bought was a Corolla. Good experiences in the past.
 
Can't go wrong with corolla camry civic accord any of those come in stick and reliable yes their boring but the 90s civic si are fun cars all in that price range
 
500 miles a week? I'd buy a commuter car. The gas savings alone will pay for it.
 
The Ranger is an okay little truck but with in your situation, you need an econo box or at least something that delivers 30 mpg and starts every day. Doing oil changes on my daughter's '06 Corolla showed me what great car they are. So did my future DIL's 93 Prizm college beater. The '06 Corolla racked up 180K miles before it was badly rubbed by a drunk. Minimal maintenance and it ran like a watch. It and my brother's '10 Tacoma base model with AC as the only option convinced me to buy the '09 Camry

OTOH, if your Ranger is a 2.3 with a 5spd and is fairly reliable and you can stand 100 miles a day in it you could take the money for the total , buy back the Ranger and hang a tail light on it.
grin2.gif
.
 
Last edited:
Another vote for the cummuter car.

If you get an older Corolla/Prizm, get one with the 5MT or 4AT transmission. There was a 3-speed AT that wasn't great for highway travel.
 
They don't make Rangers anymore... $1500 is too low!

There is a HUGE demand for compact pickups, just look at Ranger prices on Dealer lots!!!!!!!

There is no compact trucks in the N.A. market, seller beware!! I would love to be able to buy a small pickup. But I mean an actual small pickup, like everybody used to make back in the '70s and '80s. And I mean a standard cab pickup, not some crew cab monstrosity that costs a fortune and gets terrible mileage. There is nothing small about the new Tacoma and Frontier.
 
Last edited:
Buy a cheap used Corolla. That's almost kind of like what I did, and have not looked back. Cheap in maintenance, reliable and great on gas. Don't beat on it and you will get great gas mileage.. They are super easy to work on also, oil changes, trans fluid dump and fills etc..Id go for the 2003 or newer Corolla. Worst case keep the Ranger if its still driveable.. what mpg you getting with it? Driving a Corolla hard will diminish your MPG savings.. if you drive gentle you will get great MPG.

Please do yourself a favor and dont buy a 1988 truck.. thats just ridiculous considering you plan to drive it 500 miles a week. It wont last.
 
Why consider buying another truck if you already have the Ranger? Just drive the Ranger as is. At least you know the vehicle and can assume it can be reliable.
 
Another Ford guy checking in. I would NOT bother changing trucks. Rangers are reliable and economical. However, If you're driving 500 miles per week, econobox might be the way to go. Obviously Civics and Corollas are legendary. I also believe that a Zetec/MTX75 Focus is a near-perfect commuter.
 
For commuting, get a car, for mpg alone. The 2003 F150 might not be bad to bounce around in, but would you enjoy banging around in a 1988 one? Parts will be cheaper, gas will be cheaper...

You could keep the Ranger, and get a beater to rack up the miles on. Heck, just drive the Ranger for now. But if you really want out, sell it, get a car. When done with school and making the big bucks, then get a truck.

Speaking of trucks... your sig indicates you have a full size truck already? Is it some sort of race-only toy?
 
Originally Posted By: Nick1994
Why consider buying another truck if you already have the Ranger? Just drive the Ranger as is. At least you know the vehicle and can assume it can be reliable.


My thought too. Why? Established reliable by you. Known maintenance history. Cost to buy = nil. You'll be able to concentrate on school rather than maintenance and possible repairs (and costs!) of repairs on an unknown vehicle.
 
1988 truck, how far are you driving every day ?
How reliable will it be?

Buy econobox, finish school.... then buy a truck. 500 miles per tank in my Civic is easy.
 
Originally Posted By: andyd
The Ranger is an okay little truck but with in your situation, you need an econo box or at least something that delivers 30 mpg and starts every day.

OTOH, if your Ranger is a 2.3 with a 5spd and is fairly reliable and you can stand 100 miles a day in it you could take the money for the total , buy back the Ranger and hang a tail light on it.
grin2.gif
.


Maybe your Ranger doesn't start every day, but generally that's not an issue. My '02 Ranger has never failed to start in its life. I really wonder why you even have your Ranger still, you seem to have a fairly disparaging opinion of them. I'd get rid of a vehicle if I didn't like it, trust it, or if it was causing me a lot of problems.

To the OP, the damage sounds pretty minimal and cheap to repair on a Ranger. If there's no cab or frame damage, there's nothing to fixing the truck. Plenty of beds and bed parts available. Bumpers are no problem, lights are no problem, and everything is cheap. There is enormous aftermarket collision parts support for the Ranger because it was so common for so long. Or just fix it as much as you need to...which is easy on Rangers because they are so simple.

If you just want something different, it sounds like you need to decide which is a bigger priority...gas mileage or having a truck. If you have a V6 Ranger and are used to the fuel economy, full size trucks in general won't be much worse, but a 300 I6 probably will. A 300 I6 is low-mid teens MPG all day, and while it's a good old school work truck engine, those trucks are Lima 2.3L slow. I wouldn't really want to commute with one, at least not regularly. And while in general these trucks were tough, you're talking about one that is going to be 30 years old in a couple of years. Everyone selling a vehicle for $1700 says it runs great, so that doesn't mean much. 30 years is old, and you will notice it unless the truck was exceptionally well cared for/lightly used, which at $1700 it wasn't. REALLY nice 1988 F-150s are many times that price for a reason. You need to be prepared to fix things on a $1700 28 year old vehicle...Ford, Toyota, Honda, it doesn't matter...old is old. I drive my 1994 Ranger frequently, but I am also familiar with this particular model of old truck, and I changed all the fluids, cooling system hoses, t-stat, and other odds and ends before I even got the tag for it. It's probably more trustworthy than a whole lot of vehicles that are way newer than it, but part of that is because I know what I'm doing.

If your Ranger is a Duratec 2.3, you should probably keep it if you want a pickup and MPG...that's the only thing that's going to do it. Even new trucks (at least gas engine ones) don't really touch the Duratec Ranger for fuel economy. $1500 sounds like a pretty bad deal on your end for it unless it's really messed up. 136K is nothing, and $1500 gets you [censored] for a replacement.
 
As a wild guess, I'd hazard a more modern 2.3/5-speed manual Ranger would get about 25 mpg in mostly highway driving. A used late 1990's commuter car will likely get about 30-35 mpg if driven gently. The cost of acquisition will about negate any fuel economy advantage. Fix up the truck and drive it into the ground.
 
Originally Posted By: sciphi
As a wild guess, I'd hazard a more modern 2.3/5-speed manual Ranger would get about 25 mpg in mostly highway driving. A used late 1990's commuter car will likely get about 30-35 mpg if driven gently. The cost of acquisition will about negate any fuel economy advantage. Fix up the truck and drive it into the ground.


Dunno but I'd think it'd get closer to 30, I can easily get 26 mpg highway out of my either of my Grand Marquis...

The dual tank setup on the '80s F150 was troublesome('90s marginally better), I wouldn't trust it with one already inoperative...
 
Originally Posted By: sciphi
As a wild guess, I'd hazard a more modern 2.3/5-speed manual Ranger would get about 25 mpg in mostly highway driving. A used late 1990's commuter car will likely get about 30-35 mpg if driven gently. The cost of acquisition will about negate any fuel economy advantage. Fix up the truck and drive it into the ground.


My Daughter's ranger stick shift gets almost exactly that in all city driving. It's a pretty fair example of a decent little vehicle.

True economy is about far more than just fuel mileage. That later model car will indeed suck up fuel slower but likely will need to see your wallet more often.....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top