beater mini trucks, whats best?

-
pishta

pishta

I know I'm right....
Joined
Oct 13, 2004
Messages
23,824
Reaction score
13,683
Location
Tustin, CA
I got about a 3K budget. What do you guys think about Ford Ranger Pickups? Seems they are the cheapest mini's out here and seem to get pretty good ratings. Was leaning toward a Toyota as the interiors are way better, but they are usually double the miles at the same price. Looking at a early Square Dakota V6 tomorrow, cheap but has 210,000 miles on it. I just need a reliable truck to go 25 miles each way on a flat freeway hauling nothing but the occasional engine block or load of tree branches. Crew cab is a plus, 4cyl or economical 6, no full size. Mileage is more important than power, I would buy a VW Diesel pickup in a heartbeat if I could find one locally. Oh, and does anyone have a carfax subscription?>
 
90s Nissan D21 or Hardbody (Same truck different names) Cant kill them things especially with a 5 spd
V6 would be best and get nearly the same milage as the 4 bangers. Last year of V6 5 spds was 95
My dad had an awesome one he had bought new 95 ext cab V6 5 spd only options bein heat and air and got rid of it as we got bigger. Still miss that truck...
 
I have a Ranger that I've been pretty happy with. Cheap insurance, low maintenance so far, it ain't roomy but it serves its purpose reliably.
 
I had a Ranger for a lot of years, ran great. Also had a Yota which never gave me trouble.
 
Got a 2001 Ranger just turned 97K miles. Never had to do anything except last year replaced the fuel pump. Took it to smog guy replaced a couple sensors then the light on the dash came back on. Then one day it would not start....... Full tank of fuel no fuel pressure. Replaced the in tank pump which was a JOB..... No problems since.
 
I have a Ford Ranger as my daily driver. I've had it for over 10 years and it has been the best vehicle I've ever owned! It is a 2001 Edge model with a 4.0 litre V6. It has pulled my boat many miles, to many different fishing holes. Its taken my son and I to every hockey arena in the province and still doesn't burn a drop of oil!

I LOVE MY RANGER!!!
 

Attachments

  • 003 (Copy).JPG
    117.3 KB · Views: 340
Dakota with the 3.9 are good trucks but if you are looking for mpg stay away from them.
 
>89? (90?) through '93? MITSU powered 'Dodge' D-50,

I have 2, the first, now re---'tired' (lmao) has 399k on the clock...

I found a second (and using it as a D/D), for $ 1.6k, had 1.2k original miles.

1) POWER!! 2.4 L single cam, based off the 4G63 platform... this little beast has more engine than the body can support!

2) MPG !!!! 5k miles average @ 65 mph is about 35 per gal.

My humble $.02
 
No danger in a ranger, many mail carriers use them here but they seem to go for higher $$
Toyota's would be my pick personally for a low buck driver ifyou can find one that
has over 100.000 miles on it so you can pick it up cheep, yes, they keep going and easy to work on and parts are everywhere
 
drive this every day and use it to tow my 19' trailer

very reliable but the 3.4L is a little thirsty
 

Attachments

  • 002.jpg
    77.5 KB · Views: 308
My younger brother had a late 90's Ranger for about 10 years. He was terrible at doing maintenance but still ended up putting over 200K miles on the thing before he killed it
 
I found a nice 96 Dakota 3.9 2wd. for around $1500. I checked mileage on a 2 hour highway trip and got 19.2 driving 55 with the cruise set. Nice truck. I like
it better than my 2000 for comfort. tmm
 

Attachments

  • 018.jpg
    117.4 KB · Views: 333
On older 2.2 5spd Rampage. The potential for engines in the future is endless. Add a neon SRT 4 motor and you have a very quick and economical pick-up. Or find an old shelby motor. Keep your roots . buy a dodge.
 
pishta said:
I got about a 3K budget. What do you guys think about Ford Ranger Pickups? Seems they are the cheapest mini's out here and seem to get pretty good ratings. Was leaning toward a Toyota as the interiors are way better, but they are usually double the miles at the same price. Looking at a early Square Dakota V6 tomorrow, cheap but has 210,000 miles on it. I just need a reliable truck to go 25 miles each way on a flat freeway hauling nothing but the occasional engine block or load of tree branches. Crew cab is a plus, 4cyl or economical 6, no full size. Mileage is more important than power, I would buy a VW Diesel pickup in a heartbeat if I could find one locally. Oh, and does anyone have a carfax subscription?>
Click to expand...

The rangers are ok if you get the manual trans. You can't go wrong with an early Dakota or s10. We put a 4.3 in my 87 an got 21hwy with a carb that was far too big. Of course the Toyota will be king of the crop for reliability and economy
 
I've had two 86 Rangers. The older ones had weak 4 speeds, one of mine got really noisy, and the one in it now is a "little" noisy. But generally, they were reliable

I bought a 98, less than 80K, with a 4.0 V6 pushrod. "It did" what the www. "says" they "all" do and that is it failed the cam position sensor. If your engine uses one, it's wise to cast a slanted eye on it. They can fail, squeek, freeze, and break the cam gear. It's currently torn down, replacing that thing is a PITA. Basically, it's a sawed off distributor, but the EFI manifold makes it impossible to access.

My next choice, if I live that long, will probably be a Toy
 
mech1nxh said:
>89? (90?) through '93? MITSU powered 'Dodge' D-50,

I have 2, the first, now re---'tired' (lmao) has 399k on the clock...

I found a second (and using it as a D/D), for $ 1.6k, had 1.2k original miles.

1) POWER!! 2.4 L single cam, based off the 4G63 platform... this little beast has more engine than the body can support!

2) MPG !!!! 5k miles average @ 65 mph is about 35 per gal.

My humble $.02
Click to expand...

:thumblef: I'm still on the hunt for one! diesel of course
 
I bought this Dakota for $750 with a bad steering rack. Fixed it and put fresh tires on and it has now been a very reliable worker for me for 6-7 years. Its a `94 with a 4 cyl. 5 speed and is very good on gas.
 

Attachments

  • sept. 30 2010 1091_1.jpg
    110.7 KB · Views: 284
MoparDaddy said:
The rangers are ok if you get the manual trans.
Click to expand...

I agree, with any cheap used car, manual seems to minimize your expense exposure for tranny issues.

I think the ranger is the best bang for buck, cheap to get, cheap to keep running. I love the toyotas, but everyone thinks they have one that will last 500k miles so they want quite a bit more for them.

Of course, driving a v6 89 dakota convertible in high school I have a sweet spot for those, but the seem to have all the maintenance you would expect from one of our old cars- not very conducive to daily driving.

I was shopping for a ranger, ended up getting a focus zx3 and have the back seat folded down so I can haul- since I didn't really need a truck and wanted more foot room since i am 6' 3" (moved the seats back 10 inches)
 
Nobody mentioning Mazdas. I have no experience but I've heard they are very reliable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top