Ford ranger
- Thread starter Willlewis
- Start date
Timbo
Member
- Location
- Gods County
Rusty asf usually.
Oh right well the one I’ve seen has done 82000 miles and is immaculate
Timbo
Member
- Location
- Gods County
Get on your back with a screwdriver
serf
Member
- Location
- warwickshire
Had an 2004 not sure if that's same as 06 design but it pulled really well with 10' decked trailer full of sheep , but drank fuel like they all do .
Had oil in water in the end so that finished it off and chap from Zimbabwe bought it to repair and send over there to his family cos he said they weren't so fussy on mot over there
- Location
- Limousin
If its genuine get it bought. I've got a 2004 one from new an its the best vehicle I've ever had. The only none service items its had are new glow plugs and an exhaust bracket which lasted about another 3 years, been fastened up with wire for the last 10. Can't say much about chassis rot as its spent most of its time in the milder climes of France. First gear is a bit tall when you are towing any weight and it will take the fuel consumption down to the low 20's mpg.
Not sure about all models but watch the crank pulley, pulley mounting wore on our 2001 ranger, lead to over heating and a new head being fitted
With the mazda engine ?
I've had 2 , brilliant vehicles but they all rusted up now unless they've been treated ...... every year
Cowabunga
Member
- Location
- Ceredigion,Wales
If it wasn't waxoyl'd from new then the chassis, like most other brands, is likely to have a degree of rust by now. Mine is a 2006, waxed once when new and is now showing signs of a rash around the rear wheel arch part of the chassis.
Economy? Poor, but mine works hard and does next to no long unladen journeys at all. Reliability has been good so far with only an EGR valve under warranty, a leaky fuel cooler radiator and a failed 'evaporator' in front of the DPF. Cost next to nothing in repairs so far. I'm actually amazed that the rear axle has stood up to the strain actually.
Oh, forgot that the cab courtesy light isn't switched by the driver's door opening any longer. There is no physical switch to be found on modern vehicles and I have no idea how they are switched this days. Plus the leather on the steering wheel has worn through in one place. Otherwise it cleans up literally as new and I've had a 'We buy any van' valuation of £11500 on it.
Economy? Poor, but mine works hard and does next to no long unladen journeys at all. Reliability has been good so far with only an EGR valve under warranty, a leaky fuel cooler radiator and a failed 'evaporator' in front of the DPF. Cost next to nothing in repairs so far. I'm actually amazed that the rear axle has stood up to the strain actually.
Oh, forgot that the cab courtesy light isn't switched by the driver's door opening any longer. There is no physical switch to be found on modern vehicles and I have no idea how they are switched this days. Plus the leather on the steering wheel has worn through in one place. Otherwise it cleans up literally as new and I've had a 'We buy any van' valuation of £11500 on it.
- Location
- Limousin
Yes.
11,500 for 2006 ? never
Cowabunga
Member
- Location
- Ceredigion,Wales
Totally my mistake. I lose track of time and still call the program 'Film 21', 'Film 74'.
My old Mazda based one was 2006 or 7. My current one is actually 2014.
It is very probable that a 2004 to 2006 or earlier will be drinking at the last chance saloon with the next inevitable stop being the scrapyard.
Last edited:
fermerboy
Member
- Location
- Banffshire
I still have my 2004 Ranger, on limited use licence now.
Rust has taken a fair toll on it, wings and front bumber are held together with tec screws now.
Crossmember that hold up the rear of the gearbox went which was the end of road use for it.
Mechanically it been bloody good, its hardly had anything other than an occasional service. But they eat back springs, well mine did/dose. Garage lad reckons its running about empty most of the time that knackers them.
I used to get about 25mpg with it which I thought was poor till I got a Hilux 3litre auto
They are only 109hp with an old design engine but pulling the Ifor 14ft stock box about the farm its as good as the Toyota, ultimately on a longer run with faster traffic the Hilux has the power though.
Rust has taken a fair toll on it, wings and front bumber are held together with tec screws now.
Crossmember that hold up the rear of the gearbox went which was the end of road use for it.
Mechanically it been bloody good, its hardly had anything other than an occasional service. But they eat back springs, well mine did/dose. Garage lad reckons its running about empty most of the time that knackers them.
I used to get about 25mpg with it which I thought was poor till I got a Hilux 3litre auto
They are only 109hp with an old design engine but pulling the Ifor 14ft stock box about the farm its as good as the Toyota, ultimately on a longer run with faster traffic the Hilux has the power though.
dowcow
Member
- Location
- Lancashire
Asked family member mechanic about them a few years ago. He said what many others here have said 'Rustbuckets.'
2wd or 4wd? 2006 is the changeover year isn't it? Certainly is on this side of the world.
Pre 2006 (1999 ish to 2006) was a mechanically injected 2.5L "WL" engine which was bulletproof, but a bit of an old slow boat anchor by todays standards. Not uncommon to need the head replacing around the 300,000km mark. The 4wd transmissions were a bit soft too, but that was a higher mileage issue too.
Post 2006 (up to about 2009?) went to common rail with a 3.0L "WE" engine, it was also pretty good. The EGR coolers commonly leak coolant into the exhaust/engine and cook the engines so they're often replaced as a preventative maintainence sort of item. I've done my fair share of heads on them too once they get to around the 300,000km mark. Trans problems on 4wd models is not uncommon with them but again, higher mileage stuff.
I wouldn't hesitate to buy either of them if there was no rust.
But I could be completely wrong....afterall, the UK market seems to have some weird vehicle/engine combinations that the rest of the world never saw.
Pre 2006 (1999 ish to 2006) was a mechanically injected 2.5L "WL" engine which was bulletproof, but a bit of an old slow boat anchor by todays standards. Not uncommon to need the head replacing around the 300,000km mark. The 4wd transmissions were a bit soft too, but that was a higher mileage issue too.
Post 2006 (up to about 2009?) went to common rail with a 3.0L "WE" engine, it was also pretty good. The EGR coolers commonly leak coolant into the exhaust/engine and cook the engines so they're often replaced as a preventative maintainence sort of item. I've done my fair share of heads on them too once they get to around the 300,000km mark. Trans problems on 4wd models is not uncommon with them but again, higher mileage stuff.
I wouldn't hesitate to buy either of them if there was no rust.
But I could be completely wrong....afterall, the UK market seems to have some weird vehicle/engine combinations that the rest of the world never saw.
- Location
- North West
My 03 model still gets used every day, has to do a small amount of welding on the chassis about two years ago for the mot and the body is rusting around the rear arches.
Mechanically it’s had an engine @ 105000 miles, a gearbox @ 150000 (lost 2nd) and both rear springs replaced. It’s now coming up to 180000, I was hoping to take it to 200000 miles but the new low emission zones that are coming it may put at end to that! Has been a good old bus though to be fair.
Mechanically it’s had an engine @ 105000 miles, a gearbox @ 150000 (lost 2nd) and both rear springs replaced. It’s now coming up to 180000, I was hoping to take it to 200000 miles but the new low emission zones that are coming it may put at end to that! Has been a good old bus though to be fair.
Cowabunga
Member
- Location
- Ceredigion,Wales
All pickup chassis are. They are designed from the start to have a finite life of up to fifteen years maximum with ten or twelve likely if unwaxed and used in wet conditions and cowshit. The combination of mild steel plus poor solvent-free black paint used sparingly plus holes in the sidewalls strategically placed to ensure the inside of the box section gets wet and rusts through from the inside, ensures that even though the vehicle may give excellent service, you will be wanting a replacement every ten years or so.
All the brands are guilty of this but Nissan are notorious for stamping more holes than most and having the joint lightest chassis with Mitsubishi.
Last edited:
They snap in half. We have had lots and they all snap.
