97 ford ranger 2.3L, 5 spd acceleration 30-87mph 0-60mph

[zacheryds]

you really need to drop the 4.0 engine in there or the new v6 stang engine? :o that would be a scary ride.

[timmypstyle]

@zacheryds actaually a f150 lightning 5.4L apparently fits pretty well...look up the lightning bolt. aguy got rearended in his lightning so he put the drivetrain in a 2.3L ranger and only had to relocate the battery and coolant reservoir. and those were a hell of a lot faster than a V6 mustang. and if you gonna do an engine swap like that go big, dont go with a V6....unless its a diesel.

[0mcgl]

haha, Its pointless to even floor in these 2.3 at least it will get to 60 m.p.h.

[timmypstyle]

@0mcgl i can only imagine the people here in colorado....this run was in PA, i now live in CO and the elevation takes so much away...and the speed limit on some highways is 75mph....i dont know if it would stay at 75 at high elevation....lol

[0mcgl]

@timmypstyle i was in skota n my truck was runnin slow glad to be back in the south

[deweyguy1]

@timmypstyle same here im in co i can hit 85 ...90 if conditions r rite but if i hit a steep enough hill ill lose at least 5 mph but still love my truck

[timmypstyle]

@deweyguy1 man if i had the AC on....it would drop at least 10mph going up a hill. without it it would only drop 9 ll

[1971dodgedart]

i have a 2011 ranger xlt with the duratech 2.3 and a 5 speed, 4.10s it acually picks up pretty well, just did a side exit glasspack and k&n with modified airbox, its even better now.

[timmypstyle]

@1971dodgedart yeah but you have like 147hp....i had 112hp in mine with 135Lb-Ft of torque. yours probably has somewhere around 160Lb-Ft so it would pick up a lot better plus the 4.10s would help that out a lot. i dont know what rearend mine had tho.

[austinyoung300ex]

my 91 ranger wont even do 80

[timmypstyle]

@austinyoung300ex lol yeah rangers can put a frown on your face when you floor it..

[austinyoung300ex]

@timmypstyle ya its sad, they can handle some power though if you turbo it. best mod for a ranger is a posi differential with different gearing.

[MrToXiC090]

My ranger rips without the sandbags in the back, i put ricers to shame, they can go cry in there 4 cyls too when a fucking ranger beats there ass

[JayGeePee1]

I had a 4 banger Ranger, good on gas but slow as molasses on a winter day. I sold it and bought a 97 3.0L, which isn't that fast, but it kicked the shit out of the 4 cylinder one I had. It does all right on gas, and has that extra torque from the V6 to get off the line a little quicker at the stop lights. Not to mention the towing capacity difference. I had 1500lbs of shingles and trash in the back, while towing a trailer loaded with about the same. Check my channel out, I have a 0-60.

[timmypstyle]

@JayGeePee1 mine got about 25 highway with a K&N drop-in. i now have an 08 V6 f150 with a K&N intake and an SCT tuner with custom tunes from VMP tuning. it will beat any stock V8 f150, except maybe a reg cab shortbed 2wd one but i havent seen any. without the tuner it would hang right with my buddy's 04 4.8L reg cab shortbed 2wd silverado. now he has a 06 5.3L reg cab shortbed Z71 and without the tuner i could hang with him in any gear until i had to shift, then he blew by me.

[newoluap]

87??? You can't even go back to the future at that speed

[timmypstyle]

@newoluap I KNOW!! but i forgot to put the flux capacitor in my truck anyways so it still wouldnt if it hit 88 lol

[paultakular]

lol even if 97 2.3 rangers didnt have a governor at 90 i dont think they could hit 100 lol

[timmypstyle]

@paultakular mine was the slowest around. my friend has a 93 with just intake and exhaust and he gets past 105. mine was 92mph

[twiztedninja1980]

@paultakular true i had a 97 with the 2.3 n 5speedbut if you chop the converter n put a turbo 2 muffler and remove the baffle between the mass air flow sensor and the throttlebody i bet you any money you can gain a lot of low end tourq i got mine to jack rabbit like crazy if i tacked it up to 3k n dumped the clutch in first

[lemonchewy1]

my v6 ranger is a beast compared to this!

[timmypstyle]

@lemonchewy1 a 3 year old kid on a bicycle is a beast compared to this lol. even if he is holding a pink poodle..

[TheRetroHollywood]

I would ask the 0-100 time... but I'm pretty sure it can't make it that far.

[timmypstyle]

@TheRetroHollywood LOL ding ding ding ding ding!!! we have a winner! 0-100 is at least 1.5 years. i had it for 1.5 years and never was able to hit it. fastest i got it was 92mph downhill, with a tailwind, with a corvette pushing me, with hurricane force winds pushing me, also i farted while this was happening for extra thrust and it wouldnt hit 100. LOL JK. but anyways i should point out....NO RANGERS HIT 100MPH IN THE MAKING OF THIS VIDEO!

[earlybird38]

Damn that thing is slow

[Radatatify]

@earlybird38 it's a 4 banger....what do you expect? a 5.0 mustang????

[beluga420]

loll that truck is so dman slow I got the same shit B2300 1997 slow like a fuckin turtle even tought its 5 speeed manual. don't even wanna see what automatic look like. but very realiable truck tough never had any problem with the motor

[timmypstyle]

you summed it up perfectly. slow as hell but never stopped on the side of the road. one thing that sucked was replacing the spark plugs. 4 cylinders usually equals 4 plugs. well not on these trucks. you need 8 plugs. i raced my friend's 93 ranger and his was quicker than mine even tho they were both 2.3L and mine had more horsepower than his did.

[beluga420]

ahahah yeh its true 8 plugs ahah double ignition so at least it won't ever have starting problems or run on 3 cylinder... but happilly I bought it and the guy before me had them changed recently. bought it 120 000 km and now nearly 160 did'nt put any money on motor for about 2 years except the damn steering box that was leekin no problem runs like a champ... but its not made of a racing truck ahah theres no difference beetween half gas and pedal to the floor it really suck ahah

[timmypstyle]

light on the throttle and heavy on the throttle are the same thing in that truck lol. do you have air conditioning? if not heres what happens. going on level ground at 55mph in 5th, turn on the a/c and the truck will slow down. wouldnt go any faster than 50 in 5th unless you had it past 65 already. wierd powerband on those trucks too. but good luck going up a steep hill with a/c on. i always turned it off so i could go above 35mph from a stop.

[beluga420]

lol no I don't have A/C and yeah the overdrive really sucks on this truck it is cuz its the same transmission as on the 3.0 and 4 liter but... on a 2.3L loll the other time I was going on a hill I took it at around 55 mph and I was pedal to the floor on 3rd.... there was a papy beside me with a big lincoln v8... I was still to the floor ... 50, 45, 40 ,35... the papy was now ahead I shifted second BANG 4000rpm pedal to the floor... the only thing it did is it stayed at same speed so underpowered

[timmypstyle]

yup, had same thing except no pappy around lol. but actually mine would do that in 3rd gear. 4000rpms was around 52mph. it would stay right there. now i have my V6 f150 and its got some power to it. i have raced 4 V8 pickups an beat all of them. my buddy has an 04 silverado reg cab shortbed 2wd 4.8L V8 and from a stop he gets me but from a 40 roll i won 2 out of 3. his is 285hp, mine is around 210. also raced 2 08 silverado 4x4s with the 5.3L and a 96 ram but not sure if it was 318 or 360.

[cvmiata]

i hear ya, the plugs on the intake side were a little tricky had to find a few extensions and a little patience

[timmypstyle]

@cvmiata hell i took mine to my mechanic and he got 5 of them and then after looking a bit found the boot pullers under the hood for the other 3. but he said he still had a hell of a time. cant remember where he said they were hidden tho.

[timmypstyle]

@beluga420 i posted 2 video responses. both are my 08 f150. one is at the drag strip vs the 96 ram, the other is just a 0-100 video. A LOT quicker than the ranger. by the way, whats the fastest you ever got the ranger? i got 92mph downhill in 4th gear but i had a aerodynamic fiberglass highrise cap on it

[beluga420]

ok gotta watch those, only 92 mph? I was able to go to 165 kmh since I'm in canada downhill too and it still wanted some more ahah but I let go at this speed you don't have any control ahahah that about 102-103 mph I think. now my universal joint is dead gotta change it I did too much burnout with my oversized tires at the end of summer it killed it ahahah

[timmypstyle]

@beluga420 i guess that 75Lb cap held it back lol. you can do a burnout with yours? i never really tried because i assumed it wouldnt. but i could tell the difference for the 2 months the cap was off, just never got to do another tops speed run.

[beluga420]

hell yeah I can do hell of a burnout heheh sry I don't have videos of it , but yeah you drop the clutch of at over 5000 rpm and BANG big burnout! But with my over sized tires it was more difficult but with some canola oil it burned em like hell, wait 'till winter is gone I'ma put back on my oversized tire and film it you gotta love this ahaha but I'm not asking why now I need a new universal joint lmao. if you got regular size 2.3L tires, it will surely do a burnout:) If you try it make a video

[timmypstyle]

@beluga420 oh i dont have my ranger anymore. been gone for about 4 years now. had an 04 f150 but never tried spinning them. but it would kick the rear end out about i foot to the right shifting into 2nd at 40mph with a V6. my 08 is heavier so it wont do it. and the 08 will spin them but it hops really bad so i dont do it. even in rain it hops.

[beluga420]

wanna see how looks mine with some big explorer limited edition mags and tires ? check out my video camry extreme beating how to repair a fender the title says it all ahah my pikcup kills that camry

[mitch9521]

i am thinking of getting a 95-97 ranger for my first vehicle, what should i go with? i want some preformance but not at an insane insurance cost.

[timmypstyle]

well for 95-97, go with the 4.0L or the 3.0L V6. the 4.0 has more power but isnt insane on the power. only about 165hp. my 97 2.3L was only 112hp. if i were you i would go newer if you can and get the 4.0L and dont even waste your time if its a 2.5L. they were so junky that ford only used them for 3 years

[BeboAltizer]

whats a better high rpm engine? 2.3, 3.0, or 4.0?

[timmypstyle]

well for power the 4.0 is the way to go, but the 2.3 is the highest revving i believe. the 3.0 is pretty much worthless these days, ford actually dropped it because the 2.3L is only a few hp less than it is.

[BeboAltizer]

thanks, what its for is the local circuit race. it is part road, and part creek and mud. so i thought that since my svo mustang was fast i woudl be able to build a 2.3 ranger up, but i think i will just go with a 4.0 thanks.

[timmypstyle]

the mid 90's 4.0L was rated around 165hp, the newer ones are 210hp. the 2.3 in my 97 ranger was only 112hp, now i think they are 143 or 147hp. i think its 143 tho. pretty sure the 3.0L was the one with 147hp. if you have the cash, you might want to build up the 2.3L i have never seen anyone build up a 4.0L so i dont know how long it would last with a turbo or whatever on it. if you really want a good 4cylinder, get one out of a PT cruiser turbo GT, they can get to like 700hp on stock internals

[BeboAltizer]

HOLY SHIT!!!!!!!!! 700 horses on stock internals? that would make one hell of a baja bug!!!! thanks :)

[timmypstyle]

it may not be 700 but its up there. almost positive its above 500. at least the year daimler took over. my uncle has one and it has all carbon fiber interior panels and mercedes looking pedals and stuff. leather seats, sunroof. the works. it is quick too, it surprised the hell out of me when i took a ride in it. stock 0-60 is 6.3 seconds. anyway the engine has a lot of special stuff in it like oil jets for the bottoms of the pistons to keep them cool. i think a vid is on youtube of a 700hp one

[timmypstyle]

just basically saying that if you have the choice of engines you want to build up, i would say dont go with anything ford. best 4s and V6s would probably be, i hate to say it, japanese cars. a lot of them have higher hp ratings already, put the money into them. like a nissan maxima's engine or something like that.

[BeboAltizer]

lol, it may be wrong of me, but i like to buy american as much as possible. but thanks for your help. :)

[BeboAltizer]

WOW!!! i was hoping to get ~250 horses. so thanks!!!

[honda540]

wow fucking like 20 to 70 in 30 seconds

[timmypstyle]

yeah, my 08 V6 f150 goes 0-100 in less time than this thing did 30-80

[93DngRRanger]

sorry man ur trucks slow. my 93 2.3 (stock) is quicker than this. i'll have a vid up in a few days.

[timmypstyle]

yeah the clutch pedal was broken. it would probably get to 60 about 2 seconds quicker than this when it was normal. but i havent had this truck for abot 3yrs now. have an 08 f150 V6 now, a lot faster like night and day

[box200105]

no men is bad

[jelder0006]

hell atleastyour speedo works i have no idea how fast im going

[killer42c]

i have a 95 5spd 2.3 top speed 60 no joke 60. i tried to pass my friend the other day floored it and he just sped up so i couldnt do it. he has a toyota camery 03.

[josh198869]

well you need to get your truck fixed i got a 96 ford ranger with a 1998 2.5 5 speed and it will do close to 110

[timmypstyle]

yeah the 2.5 has more power than a 95's 2.3L but the 2.5 sucks compared to the 2.3 in reliability, thats why they only had it for 4 years. my 97 2.3 had 112hp and in 95 i think it was about 105. my friends 93 was rated at 93 or 97hp but he had high performance exhaust and cold air intake and computer chip so it would barely beat my 97. he beat me up a hill but we raced again on flat ground and i beat him but not by much

[josh198869]

i dont no about the reliability in the 2.3 cuz mine only lasted maybe 175.000 miles be for i had blown a head gasget on it so i replaced it did the work myself and it did it again so i found a 2.5l from a 1998 used that and have not had any trouble but then again that 2.5 that i have now only had 60.000 miles i got to here it run be for i bought it and i saw the miles only payed 500 bucks for it lol

[timmypstyle]

well 175k is kind of a lot. but i have a friend that has over 300k on his 93(one i mentioned that i raced) and he has never had any trouble except spark plugs and wires and a clutch. doesnt even leak oil. and hell if you got any running engine for 500 bucks and put it in, i dont think the reliability matters for only 500 bucks lol

[ubernastydrift]

i have the same truck 98 2.5 and the goddamn thing topped out at 92 going downhill. my tired 95 dakota went faster. i guess its mopar or no car?

[timmypstyle]

since the ranger i have had 2 V6 f150s. an 04 heritage(03 style) and now an 08 both 5 speeds. the heritage i had up to 108 and ran out of road, still was in 4th gear and had pedal left. my 08 gets to 100 about 5 seconds quicker than my 04 but unfortunately it is limited at 100. 100mph was 3600rpms in my 04 in 4th gear and in my 08 is 4000rpms in 4th gear. different gearing which is why my 08, almost 500Lbs heavier than my 04, is quicker to 100. 0-60 is exactly the same so far at 9.58 seconds

[1969MustangMACH1]

I have a 93 ranger 2.3 5 speed and it goes well passed the 85 mark

[fuzznuts16]

check and see if your throttle cable is stretched out...pull the gas pedal all the way up and if there is slack in the cable put zip ties on it to space it out and get rid of the slack....thats the problem I had with mine my top speed was about 60mph and I put the zip ties on and it went up to 85mph with much better torque and power

[box200105]

jajaja slowly dodge is better

[itsapookie]

nice i got an 07 with a 2.3 5spd i get about 85 out of 3rd gear at about 6000 rpms so yeah this aint bad

[timmypstyle]

yeah my 97 might have done 75-80 in 3rd at 6k. hell my 04 f150 heritage did over 90 in 3rd with the V6 and my 08 V6 goes to about 80 in 3rd. 04 was 3.08 rear end, 08 is 3.55. no clue what ranger was

[jcupsmells]

why would you video that if it wasnt floored. were you trying to show how slow you can drive...

[timmypstyle]

no. ive only floored a vehicle twice. the reasons i didn't floor it were because the clutch pedal was broken, i was trading it in 2hrs after i took vid. it was almost floored, some vehicles are faster not floored. id rather not blow the engine to just make a video. and besides it goes to 87mph, which is only 5mph less than the top speed it went

[odds1591]

ive had my 98 2.5l ranger going 105 in 4th gear on ice so it cant top out 92

[timmypstyle]

well 97 had 112hp, 98 had a slight bump up in hp. it is amazing what 5 or 10hp will do. but yes 92mph downhill in 4th with me and my exgirlfriend who weighed maybe 150Lbs and i was about 165Lbs and it had a fiberglass cap(aerodynamic high rise) and got 92, tried to see if 5th would help but it slowed down(still going downhill). it may have been a little windy but it wasnt that bad or i wouldnt have tried topping it out.

[sicknizz]

I'v got one of these but mine is a standard it's factory with a nice pair of rims "America Racing Tourqe Thrusts 2 looks like cragers* and mine runs a lot better then this

[timmypstyle]

yeah, this one was a standard too. i just didnt wind it out all the way and the clutch pedal was broken so the clutch would catch twice when i only let the pedal out once. it was actually a little quicker than this but maybe only like a second or 2 to 60mph. it was an XLT made in late 97 so it had a 98 cab but with a 97 grille and headlights. 98's cab was 2 inches longer than 97. this one also had A/C and a tach as you can see. but it had stock 14 inch rims on it.

[ferrariF43091]

he said it wasnt floored...bull crap!!!!

[timmypstyle]

no it actually wasnt floored. no B.S. probably pretty close to it but not floor. i've only ever floored a vehicle twice because i would go to pass someone and they would speed up, then a car would pop up over a hill coming towards me. but those were my 89 firebird and my 04 f150 that i had that happen in. even when i race i dont floor it. i'd rather not blow my engine since i usually drive trucks. not made for punishment like racing. even my 96 trans am i never floored. lol didnt need to to win

[OCULAR420]

I drive a 97 xlt 2.3L and it don't have an R.P.M. gauge.

[timmypstyle]

yeah, i had 2 other friends that had 97 XLT's and they both had no tach or a/c. mine was made in may or june of 97 and the guy i bought it off of said that since it was made so late in 97, that they put stuff from 98's redesigned and extended truck in the later 97's. he said the cab was 2 inches longer than a normal 97's cab was. my tach went to 6 but i never had it there. i only got up to 5 1/2k rpms but ive been told they are limited at 6500 by the ignition and that they will blow at 8200.

[sidekickslappy]

yeah I've got a 96 2.3l, I got an A-pillar gauge pod and tach from summit racing, looks pretty good. Nice to see how many rpms your pulling too.

[timmypstyle]

oh 5k is not the limit for the 2.3L. ive never had mine above 5 1/2k but ive heard they will go up to 6 or 7(ignition limited) but theat the engine will go up to 8200 before blowing. my tach only went to 6 but ford probably figured that no one in their right mind would take it above 6k, unfortunately they forgot about all of us who arent in our right mind lol

[Beldar4214]

The 2.8 was the Ranger's V6 option from 83-85, the 2.9 didn't come till 86', and the 3.0 never came until 1990(?). Looking at the numbers, the 2.8 is just like the 2.8 in the early S10's/Blazers; peppy engine for only 115HP.

[dustinwaller87]

i got a 2.3 92 ranger and i have a ported upperandlower intake. full borla exhaust bbk header and a 5.0mustang 65mm throttle body and some 42lb injectors...it does 0-60 in around 5.8secs... these trucks arent so fast stock but put a few hundered and u can keep up with mustang gt's...and they are extremaly reliable.. im looking to put a t3 turbo kit on it..!!

[timmypstyle]

5.8 seconds? holy shit! thats what my 96 trans am did. is it all low end or does it keep power in higher speeds?

[vintageracer89]

lol, you have to be kidding, my ranger had about 2K into the engine alone with MS stand alone engine management and it still only ran a 14.2 on DR's. It takes alot to make a N/A 2.3 fast, turbo is the only way to go with that motor.

[endurance5600]

dude are you kidding. Man 5.8 sec. I also own one 2.3 i put a performance air filter and a race exhaust. How fast it goes i do not realy know but it sprint very fast wel from 0-80 km/h in 5 sec. My tires are ply 14/215/75

[dustinwaller87]

well i have quit a bit of modds on it..i dnt have that truck anymore tho..check out the truck i have now..

[endurance5600]

i own a 1992 ford ranger 2300 xlt single cab lwb. Four banger with dual plugs. I think yours a 87 or so huh. Nice vid. Thanks anyway man.

[dustinwaller87]

actulay its a 81..

[Beldar4214]

Yea my 2.3 isn't so good either. I've tried to pass someone before and actually had to hit the brakes and get back behind them because I wasn't gonna make it.... its pathetic

[timmypstyle]

i know the feeling bud. yes it is pathetic, takes like a mile to pass someone. i no longer have my ranger tho. have an 04 f150 heritage with a V6 and it has a lot more passing power.

[Magnuspire]

I've had something like that happen to me once. I was pushing 80ish to keep up with my bro-in-law who was headed back to his house. He passed up some guy in a Suzuki Samari with ease, when I started to pass them up they tried to speed up so I couldn't pass them. Still passed them though, pushing 96mph (speed limiter) in 4th gear. Good thing it's there too.

Then again I don't drive the 2.3. I've got the stroked 2.3L aka the 2.5L that only lasted for 4 1/2 years before it was discontinued.

[Beldar4214]

I want to find another Ranger, with at least the 3.0. But im thinking about buying a friend's Ranger with the carb 2.8 since its got 70k with one elderly owner. :)

[timmypstyle]

a 2.8? ive never heard of that in a ranger, i could be wrong tho. but dont get a 3.0L youll be disappionted i think. either get the 2.3 for fuel economy but NO POWER or get the 4.0L. the 4.0L has good power and only gets a little less gas mileage than the 3.0L. but i would ask if that 2.8 is out of something else.

[Magnuspire]

Don't know where you're basing your 4.0 vs 3.0 MPG off of but a buddy of mine said his new 3.0 couldn't even come close to the MPG his old 4.0 got. As for the 2.3L... that depends on which one you're talking about. You have the 2.3L Lima (ford made) or the new 2.3 Duratech (mazda made). Now I just need to wait for all the idiots to cry and tell me I got it wrong and that ford makes the new 2.3L lol... It's happened before as you might guess.

[timmypstyle]

i have a friend that has an 01 or 02 ext cab 2wd with a 3.0L and he says he gets 18mpg maybe, and another friend with a 95 or 96 ranger ext cab 4x4 with the 4.0L(165ish HP) with cold air intake, performance exhaust, computer chip, lifted and i think it has 33's on it he says he gets about 18. i also know a guy that had an 04 explorer and he got an ave of 17-18mpg with the 210hp 4.0L. yeah mazda makes the new ones with 4 spark plugs at 143hp, mine had 112 and 8 spark plugs. the 3.0L has 148hp

[Magnuspire]

There's the problem right there. You should find someone who has a 01 to 02 4.0L ranger 2WD. keep in mind SUVs do get worse MPG than trucks. My older jeep had a I6 it got 12ish MPG. My engine pushes 117hp factory, with the dual plug head. Sporting the 5 speed manual with 3.73 gears in the back. Off the line it can easily take my sister's Chevy Blazer with the v6 simply because it's an auto. Personally, if I ever get another ranger, it'll be the new 2.3L for the MPG or a explorer v8 swap.

[timmypstyle]

i thnk either way you'll be kinda happy. a V8 explorer is nothing to laugh at. and the new 2.3L has 143hp which isnt bad at all anymore. i forgot my friend with the 4.0L ranger now has a 03 and same thing as his old one but is stock and he said he gets slightly better mileage than the old one, but that could be .5mgp more or 5mpg more. yeah your probably right. the 3L has less hp to push that vehicle and is heavier being a cast iron block compared to the 2.3L which is aluminum block.

[vintageracer89]

The old 2.3 lima engines are a completely different design than the new Duratec 2.3's. The lima's are all iron

[ranger8997]

my 2.3 5spd runs faster than that, and mines all top end power. It just has an intake and the muffler is cut off.

[timmypstyle]

i raced my friend's 93 with the 2.3 and he has a high performance exhaust and intake, and a few other things. we raced twice, once he blew me away, the other i was beating him. the one that he blew me away was on an uphill road. for some reason on flat ground i got up to speed faster. this video was also taken with a broken clutch pedal. it was better than this b4 it broke but probably only by a second or 2. mostly the shifts are very slow on this vid because of the pedal's condition

[timmypstyle]

no high,middle, or low end power lol. i liked the truck itself, just not the power it had. it sucks when its on flat ground, going 65mph, turn on the A/C and it starts slowing down. lol. had to turn A/C off if i wanted to go up a hill faster than 45. needed about a half mile to pass someone and it only got about 23mpg at best

[FordrangerMan698]

I've seen worse, looks like you don't have much high end power though