U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-10-2010, 06:22 PM
 
Location: Eastern Washington
13,423 posts, read 42,824,163 times
Reputation: 11524

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by cobolt View Post
LOL. Yeah but that guy pic in my profile is "House" (Hugh Laurie). I am not a celebrity.

I guess my mental block is that the F100 will be a gas hog, it's bigger than what I need, and parts might be hard to come by at some point, or even finding people who can work on it. Regardless, a guy friend of mine is going to check out the F100 for me tomorrow. I"ll keep you guys in the loop.
I don't know that going from 20 MPG in a Ranger to 15 in the F-100 would be all that significant- your Toy is your economical ride. For example in 1000 miles of driving the F-100 at 15 MPG would burn 67 gallons of gas, a Ranger getting 22 would burn 45. Any 67 Detroit vehicle is very easy to work on. Most wear parts for these, at least around here, are easily available at NAPA or similar. Pick up a copy of Hemmings Motor News at any good news-stand, most grocery stores have it, you will see many vendors who specialize in older trucks, some do all brands, some specialize in Ford.

This old F-100 has to be one of the easiest vehicles to maintain, any decent indy shop would welcome you as a customer - these things are simple and easy to tune right and give you a job you will be happy with quickly enough to make a good wage doing it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-10-2010, 06:26 PM
 
Location: Great Plains
25,584 posts, read 30,567,408 times
Reputation: 22713
And parts are cheap and readily available.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2010, 06:44 PM
 
1,077 posts, read 2,582,592 times
Reputation: 904
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilson1010 View Post
First, the Ranger is a pig. Small and bad gas mileage. The 67 would be ok, but all the wiring and rubber will be a crapshoot. And, if you are not towing you do not need a V8, you need a straight 6. Ford made a great dependable 6 cylinder truck all through the 80's to the mid nineties and I had several. Great trucks. Run forever. Just get an F150 or F250 with the 6 and call it a day. If you can spend $1000 on a 6 cylinder truck from the late 80's you will have a museum piece.
You know the Ranger has the best gas mileage of any truck on the road right now, right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2010, 07:00 PM
 
10,139 posts, read 22,456,274 times
Reputation: 8244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Everest209 View Post
You know the Ranger has the best gas mileage of any truck on the road right now, right?
You did see my apology, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by wilson1010 View Post

Finally, sorry about calling the Ranger a pig. I think that was not needed. Its a popular truck and a lot smarter people than me buy em.
And, at 22/27 for a 4 cylinder that's not all that impressive. I had a V8 Corvette that got that mileage. My 22re Toyota 5 speed (photo above) gets 35 mpg. But, I stand by my apology. I recognize that the Ranger is a popular truck.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2010, 07:05 PM
 
10,875 posts, read 41,244,086 times
Reputation: 14038
We've had three mid 1990's Rangers, all extended cab RWD 3.0 V-6 w/manual transmissions.

They fit the profile of being a decent transportation truck, very comfortable for my wife (who is shorter than me), and got low to mid 20's mpg at 65-70 mph.

Other than eating a few heater cores, a starter and an alternator ... the trucks have needed nothing except routine wear items/consumables (tires/brakes/battery/serp belt & idler), and an odd water pump and thermostat now and then. All the trucks were purchased with high miles and delivered at least 100,000 more miles of good service for us. With a topper, we've hauled livestock on 1,000+ mile trips. I've towed a 22' sailboat with a heavy keel with it, too, and launched the boat at a boat ramp.

An occasional dose of fuel conditioner appeared to keep the FI systems running clean, and they all required new plugs/wires/dist cap & rotor about every 65,000 miles. Pretty simple to maintain, and the trucks were greatly improved by running Kelly Springfield (or tires they made in this size under other brand names) LT tires instead of the OE P-metric tires.

You'll find that the heater and A/C in these trucks is much more powerful than the 1960's F series, and I find the truck to be much more comfortable. If you don't need the hauling size capacity of the bigger truck, don't pay for that in ongoing lower fuel economy. They'll cost about the same to insure. IMO, the mid 1990's Rangers are stone simple to work on, too. Parts readily available at your local discount auto supply store ....

I would suggest getting the small V-6 powered truck instead of the 4 cylinder Ranger. The increase in power makes them much easier to drive in traffic, the motor is very tractable, and the fuel economy is almost the same ... especially if there's a load in the truck. Even the 4.0 motor turned in respectable fuel economy if you didn't hot rod the truck, but it's somewhat excessive torque isn't needed for the job at hand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2010, 07:26 PM
 
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
14,095 posts, read 23,001,641 times
Reputation: 7957
Would you consider a Chevy S-10 with the 4.3L V-6? It's actually a pretty good workhorse engine. My dad had that engine in his 1994 S-10 Blazer and he put well over 150,000 miles on that engine before he sold it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2010, 07:37 PM
 
Location: Eastern Washington
13,423 posts, read 42,824,163 times
Reputation: 11524
One other point is that the 67 truck is old enough that you won't have to SMOG it, if you are in a region where that's required.

As a tool to get the job done, Sunsprit makes a very good case for the Ranger. My left brain agrees with him 100%. I'll add to what he already posted that the Ranger is probably safer in *most* crashes, and probably has a better brake system.

But my right brain is saying that the 67 has a cool factor that the Ranger won't ever have.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2010, 07:48 PM
 
48,519 posts, read 81,162,475 times
Reputation: 17979
If your going to use a truck for hauling and as a truck ;then there is not like a full size truck. The one thing about buying a small truck is its not not capable as a full size.you would be better to get ful satndard cab with at least a 6 ft bed. JMHO from ownuing alot of trucks over the years.Get something decent as is because their are alot of abuse trucks out there that can be a money pit from lack of maintainence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2010, 08:06 PM
 
Location: The Great State of Texas, Finally!
5,321 posts, read 10,594,649 times
Reputation: 2395
Quote:
Originally Posted by M3 Mitch View Post
One other point is that the 67 truck is old enough that you won't have to SMOG it, if you are in a region where that's required.

As a tool to get the job done, Sunsprit makes a very good case for the Ranger. My left brain agrees with him 100%. I'll add to what he already posted that the Ranger is probably safer in *most* crashes, and probably has a better brake system.

But my right brain is saying that the 67 has a cool factor that the Ranger won't ever have.
Mitch,

We think alike on this. Your left brain, right brain analogy is EXACTLY where I am right now. I want the cool factor but I don't need the big factor. Thanks for putting up w/me. I'm test driving both this weekend.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2010, 08:24 PM
 
Location: Eastern Washington
13,423 posts, read 42,824,163 times
Reputation: 11524
There is nothing to "put up" with, this is fun at least for me. I am glad to talk cars "till the cows come home".

By all means, drive both. You should probably buy the one you think is the better overall deal.

Is the F-100 a long bed or short bed? Long bed trucks do drive a bit more "like a truck" - but then again they can haul more stuff. To my way of thinking a half-ton short-bed truck is not really "big" - it's not compact, but at least around here it's not hard to find enough room to park it, it does not over-fill the lane, it seems to me sort of "normal" size. The longbeds do have a larger turning radius and can sometimes be a handful.

Learn to keep the truck moving when you are turning the steering wheel. A lot of gals tend to "wrestle" the wheel, this is hard to do, hard on the steering system, not necessary. I'm assuming the F-100 does not have power steering. I have seen a lot of old manual steering boxes that were about dry of oil, they typically take gear oil, some fill through one of the bolt holes on top where the "lid" is. A good grease job on the front end, you need to take the truck's weight off the wheels to do the ball joints right, will also help.

Good luck in any case.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top