@biglinc1 he didnt let the reves get up there... ive driven automatic 4cyl rangers for work. They rev to around 6k rpm but they dont start to really "pull" till around 4k rpm. He wasnt trying to be quick at all
@biglinc1 Nah, it has a tach so its the assembled in US version....of the Rangers I owned and allllllllll the ones ive fixed or driven...none of them had a redline for some reason.
@3wheeler016 ah... gotcha... my older rangers didnt have a tach... i saw a couple cars without red lines a few weeks ago... must be more common than i thought....
@biglinc1 A 4.0 Ranger 4x4 x-cab will barely get better gas mileage then a crew cab 4x4 F150 with the 5.4. if not worse in some cases. The 4 clyinder should get at least 20 all the time.
@640101vh i always got over 20 in my 4 cyl and sometimes over 25 if i was driving hwy only... I've heard that the 3.0L and the 4.0L's were really bad on fuel
@biglinc1 3.0L gets the same milage as the 4.0L but with about 150hp the 4.0L gets about 20MPG as said by the EPA website. I had a friend who drove an older 4.0L not the OHC version. He claimed his got 23MPG on the highway, but he babied that thing.
@Magnuspire the 2.3L duratec is rated around 145 hp, roughly the same as the 3.0L, and mpg is somewhat better. I couldn't tell much difference in power in the two, so I chose the 2.3L duratec with a manual over the 3.0L with auto, plus mpg is better and not babied...
@biglinc1 Yes, that's pretty much what I was saying. Between the 2.3L and the 3.0L the 2.3L IS the better option IMO because of the Mileage vs HP rating that they both produce. The 4.0L I think is better all around when paired with a manual because of the possibility to get above 21MPG and still have that 220HP when you need it. I currently own a 2.5L Lima with a 5 speed manual. First gear is geared like a tractor on my truck. Once I get on the highway I usually see 27MPG though.
@wwjoshdew haha... I think they started that with manuals around 01 or so, not sure... I had an old 84 and then got a 94 and neither of those had tachs on them... This one was a "high tech" upgrade... :p
@biglinc1 I ALMOST bought a 05 ranger in 05... It would of been 300 a month. But it was single cab and I am glad I didn't. Because I got laid off and I didn't get 600 bucks a week anymore. I got shit! lol. Then I found another job and made about 300 a week. So I am glad I didn't get it. I know my truck is 10 years older than yours, BUT I OWN it. I don't have to worry about not making a payment. Your truck looks awesome though. And I watched every Ranger video of yours
@mccrackenphillip the duratec 2.3L is rated at 143... the old 2.3L (pinto 4 as its sometimes referred to) only has about 95 hp... check out my burnout videos of this truck and you'll see its nothing to sneeze at for an el cheapo 4 banger...
@pearldrummerbt123 sweeet!!!! i just read today that ford is phasing out the ranger in 2011 and the sport-trac this fall.... they want everybody to buy big trucks.. go figure...
@pearldrummerbt123 haha niceeeeeeeeeeee!!!! i got a 5.3L chevy now, and its not the fastest thing on earth.... lol... that ranger would go places that my chevy won't go.. :(
@50fordman had a small tank but it ran pretty consistant around 25 hwy and 22 city... i thought that was pretty good for a 4cyl... I had a 94 2.3L manual and it never got over 16 or 17 max...
@timmypstyle my 94 was bad on gas but this 05 was great... but still the 94 was a good truck... I'm sorta sad that ford is stop making the rangers tho
@timmypstyle yeah my top end was about that... I was cramped in mine too. I sort of wish I'd found me an extended cab ranger... I kept looking for them but everywhere I went they wanted as much for those as they did for big trucks... go figure... lol
@50fordman mine is about the same, but i have 4.0 v6. hopefully you have a smaller tank or something or else your getting the same mpg as me mine takes 44 bucks to fill at 2.59 a gallon
@50fordman this one was pretty good on take off.... i got a vid on here of doing a nice burnout but its from inside the cab.. haha... You can hear some nice tire sound.. :)
Dude. You should have actually drove the truck... Perfect WOT shift point should have been around 5700 rpm. Also get a camera mount or don't take videos at all while driving. I run camera mounts on my steering wheel and dash. Makes it way safer.
22 secs what's the deal is motor governed?
HumanSlave843 5 days ago
I thought my 2.4 litre galant was slow.. damn lol
rainmouse2 3 months ago
@rainmouse2 haha yeah.... you can walk almost as fast as a danger ranger..
biglinc1 3 months ago
@biglinc1 he didnt let the reves get up there... ive driven automatic 4cyl rangers for work. They rev to around 6k rpm but they dont start to really "pull" till around 4k rpm. He wasnt trying to be quick at all
mustang633NY 2 months ago
Damn thats slow
rocalegi 4 months ago
u couldn't break this motherfucker if u wanted to. BELIEVE ME i've tried. hammer this thing man!
thewhofan99 5 months ago
@thewhofan99 haha... i hear ya... =)
biglinc1 5 months ago
wtf why doesn't your tachometer have a red line?
MegaPoopertrooper 5 months ago
@MegaPoopertrooper i dunno... first one i'd ever seen without a redline... chinese or mexican built maybe... =/
biglinc1 5 months ago
@biglinc1 Nah, it has a tach so its the assembled in US version....of the Rangers I owned and allllllllll the ones ive fixed or driven...none of them had a redline for some reason.
3wheeler016 2 months ago
@3wheeler016 ah... gotcha... my older rangers didnt have a tach... i saw a couple cars without red lines a few weeks ago... must be more common than i thought....
biglinc1 2 months ago
@MegaPoopertrooper Ford used to never do red lines.
yellowcow13 3 months ago
lol granny low first gear much
SharpStuff112 6 months ago
@SharpStuff112 haha... maybe... lol
biglinc1 6 months ago
these engines can bounce off the rec limiters all day don't be afraid to hit it!
300atsheridan 7 months ago
shortshifting much?
falaqdad15 9 months ago
@falaqdad15 haha.... not too much...
biglinc1 9 months ago
@biglinc1 wayy to much
surferdude314 6 months ago
@surferdude314 haha... surely not... ;)
biglinc1 6 months ago
My 95 2.3 ranger does 0-60 in 8 sec
slyerrulez 9 months ago
Do you think its more conomic than a v6?
SuedElf 11 months ago
@SuedElf i know for sure it is... about 4-5 mpg if not more
biglinc1 11 months ago
@biglinc1 A 4.0 Ranger 4x4 x-cab will barely get better gas mileage then a crew cab 4x4 F150 with the 5.4. if not worse in some cases. The 4 clyinder should get at least 20 all the time.
640101vh 11 months ago
@640101vh i always got over 20 in my 4 cyl and sometimes over 25 if i was driving hwy only... I've heard that the 3.0L and the 4.0L's were really bad on fuel
biglinc1 11 months ago
@biglinc1 3.0L gets the same milage as the 4.0L but with about 150hp the 4.0L gets about 20MPG as said by the EPA website. I had a friend who drove an older 4.0L not the OHC version. He claimed his got 23MPG on the highway, but he babied that thing.
Magnuspire 9 months ago
@Magnuspire the 2.3L duratec is rated around 145 hp, roughly the same as the 3.0L, and mpg is somewhat better. I couldn't tell much difference in power in the two, so I chose the 2.3L duratec with a manual over the 3.0L with auto, plus mpg is better and not babied...
biglinc1 9 months ago
@biglinc1 Yes, that's pretty much what I was saying. Between the 2.3L and the 3.0L the 2.3L IS the better option IMO because of the Mileage vs HP rating that they both produce. The 4.0L I think is better all around when paired with a manual because of the possibility to get above 21MPG and still have that 220HP when you need it. I currently own a 2.5L Lima with a 5 speed manual. First gear is geared like a tractor on my truck. Once I get on the highway I usually see 27MPG though.
Magnuspire 9 months ago
weak! u need to shift at 4.5 to 5
TRUCKMAN399 1 year ago 6
@TRUCKMAN399 haha weak is the word... like a fred flintstone truck... xD
biglinc1 11 months ago
HOLY FAST
YamahaYFS200 1 year ago 5
@YamahaYFS200 hahaha.... fred flintstone speed...
biglinc1 1 year ago
That's pretty fast compared to my dads old 83 Ford Ranger with a 2.0/ or 2.3 with 33" tires and a 4 speed... That thing felt like it had 20 hp.
Hotrodx199 1 year ago
Comment removed
Hotrodx199 1 year ago
That's pretty fast compared to my '93 OHC 2.3 Ranger.
Naz0099 1 year ago
@Naz0099 yeah i had an '86 and a '94 and they were really slow compared to this truck
biglinc1 1 year ago
You have a RPM gauge! YOU BASTARD! #LOL
wwjoshdew 1 year ago
@wwjoshdew haha... I think they started that with manuals around 01 or so, not sure... I had an old 84 and then got a 94 and neither of those had tachs on them... This one was a "high tech" upgrade... :p
biglinc1 1 year ago
@biglinc1 I ALMOST bought a 05 ranger in 05... It would of been 300 a month. But it was single cab and I am glad I didn't. Because I got laid off and I didn't get 600 bucks a week anymore. I got shit! lol. Then I found another job and made about 300 a week. So I am glad I didn't get it. I know my truck is 10 years older than yours, BUT I OWN it. I don't have to worry about not making a payment. Your truck looks awesome though. And I watched every Ranger video of yours
wwjoshdew 1 year ago
@biglinc1 i think it just depends on what package you got my friend has a 93 ranger manuel and it has a tachometer
joe98stang 1 year ago
@joe98stang could be... my 86 and 94s were both 2wd single cab 4cyls.. my 95 was also 4 cyl.. I'm not sure when ford added tachs on all rangers...
biglinc1 1 year ago
KIND OF SLOW
MY 3.0L AUTO RUNS 5500 RPM
mccrackenphillip 1 year ago
@mccrackenphillip thats just a 4-cylinder engine - 2.3L with only 143 hp... and that wasn't WOT that was about 1/2 throttle...
biglinc1 1 year ago
@biglinc1 THAT MUCH
MY 05 3.0 AUTO SAYS 148 HP
GOV AT 92 MPH.
mccrackenphillip 1 year ago
@mccrackenphillip the duratec 2.3L is rated at 143... the old 2.3L (pinto 4 as its sometimes referred to) only has about 95 hp... check out my burnout videos of this truck and you'll see its nothing to sneeze at for an el cheapo 4 banger...
biglinc1 1 year ago
@biglinc1 the pinto one in the Ranger has 112 HP.
superchargewhine 1 year ago
@superchargewhine my 94 ranger with the pinto 4-cyl only was rated at 95 hp...
biglinc1 1 year ago
@biglinc1 what website told you?
superchargewhine 1 year ago
@superchargewhine wasn't a website, was from ford motor company
biglinc1 1 year ago
@biglinc1 hmmm..
superchargewhine 1 year ago
@pearldrummerbt123 yeah prob want people to buy V10's...
biglinc1 1 year ago
@pearldrummerbt123 sweeet!!!! i just read today that ford is phasing out the ranger in 2011 and the sport-trac this fall.... they want everybody to buy big trucks.. go figure...
biglinc1 1 year ago
@pearldrummerbt123 thats amazing!!! what engine does he have?
biglinc1 1 year ago
@pearldrummerbt123 haha niceeeeeeeeeeee!!!! i got a 5.3L chevy now, and its not the fastest thing on earth.... lol... that ranger would go places that my chevy won't go.. :(
biglinc1 1 year ago
how was your fuel economy i put a half a tank of gas in mine drive about a 100 miles and im on empty
50fordman 1 year ago
@50fordman had a small tank but it ran pretty consistant around 25 hwy and 22 city... i thought that was pretty good for a 4cyl... I had a 94 2.3L manual and it never got over 16 or 17 max...
biglinc1 1 year ago
@biglinc1 my 97 got about 20mpg combined
timmypstyle 1 year ago
@timmypstyle my 94 was bad on gas but this 05 was great... but still the 94 was a good truck... I'm sorta sad that ford is stop making the rangers tho
biglinc1 1 year ago
@biglinc1 i would miss mine but it topped out at 92mph downhill and also it is small inside. i am 6'5" tall and am surprised i even fit in the thing.
timmypstyle 1 year ago
@timmypstyle yeah my top end was about that... I was cramped in mine too. I sort of wish I'd found me an extended cab ranger... I kept looking for them but everywhere I went they wanted as much for those as they did for big trucks... go figure... lol
biglinc1 1 year ago
@50fordman mine is about the same, but i have 4.0 v6. hopefully you have a smaller tank or something or else your getting the same mpg as me mine takes 44 bucks to fill at 2.59 a gallon
SaGalv 1 year ago
i just got a 2004 ford ranger 2.3 5 speed they dont have a ton of power but i got it to chirp takinfg off in 1st
50fordman 1 year ago
@50fordman this one was pretty good on take off.... i got a vid on here of doing a nice burnout but its from inside the cab.. haha... You can hear some nice tire sound.. :)
biglinc1 1 year ago
Dude. You should have actually drove the truck... Perfect WOT shift point should have been around 5700 rpm. Also get a camera mount or don't take videos at all while driving. I run camera mounts on my steering wheel and dash. Makes it way safer.
tacoma54 1 year ago
@tacoma54 i sold this old truck months ago, but if u dont like my videos dont watch them...
biglinc1 1 year ago
love that thing sounds good to!!
5-stars
TRUCKMAN399 2 years ago
hey man thanks!!!! it has a good tone inside with the flowmaster
biglinc1 2 years ago
hey man... u gotta get a vid of u flooring it and maxing out the revs before u shit.. lol do a true 0-60
dodge2289 2 years ago
nah but i'll do one for you!!!
biglinc1 2 years ago
it was a good video.. but u gotta do one like i have in my truck i wana see ur beast letting it rip!!!
dodge2289 2 years ago
ill do it man... just as soon as I can!!! this wasn't a really good spot to do anything like that...
biglinc1 2 years ago
i like to max out the revs before i shit also.
Crossfire419 2 years ago
yeah i got one thats better maxxing out revs now... newest one i put up... 4 cyls max out fairly quickly tho.. .lol
biglinc1 2 years ago
she ain't the fastest ranger on earth but she has some power man!!! :D
Pistonring05 2 years ago
haha yeah... for a little 4 banger she ain't bad... :p
biglinc1 2 years ago