Runabout Truck: Ranger vs S10 vs ?

[SumpChump]

I'm looking for a little runabout pickup, hauling yard waste a washer or dryer etc. it will see
"Some" highway miles but mostly needs to not kill me. Why not full size?... Not sure really, I just want smaller and perhaps less likely to have been brutally beaten. However both trucks below have complaints about clutch slave inside
Bell housing being a problem with the manual transmissions (which I'd
Prefer an automatic anyhow). I digress.

So I've noticed a few things:
1. Rangers are going for more $ by about 1k in this area. The rangers are either very good shape and accordingly pricey. There are cheap ones but they are at least 4years older than a similarly "well used" S10 and they tend to mention slipping transmissions or replaced transmissions. Lots of 2.3L

2. S-10s are going for less $ across the board. The $3k ones are
a little more rusty than the rangers, but not looking for a
Show truck. The cheaper ones don't really mention many problems at all. Lots of 2.2L which are rumored
not to be as good as the 2.5L. Also said to be chronic oil leakers.

So that's what I've picked up on over the past two months.

Any advantages to a Ranger? Or an S10? Any engines to avoid or troublesome year generations of either?

Any little pickups I've missed that can be found semi reliable for $2k +\- $500?

 

[Nick1994]

I'd buy an S10 but spend the $1,000 extra it would have cost to buy a Ranger in fixing it up.

 

[simple_gifts]

The Ranger DOHC 2.3L with a 5sp MT turns in over 30mpg.

Be careful, because prior to 2001 (I think) the 2.3 was the Lima motor; a different animal.

Take a gander underneath because certain years (like mine) seem to rust quickly (e.g. frame, exhaust)

My 2300 (ranger) has been dead reliable.

 

[Kruse]

I'm not sure what year or years you are looking for, but I'll throw in my $.02 worth.
About a month ago, I picked up a '98 Ranger with the 3.0/manual transmission. I was not looking to pick up another vehicle, but the truck belonged to my cousin who died a few months ago and the family wanted to settle the estate quickly. But it had brand new tires on it and I got it for a lot cheaper than the price you quoted.
My brother has an S10 is similar vintage and we both like the Ranger a lot better, although his truck is a four cylinder. While his truck has had a hard life on the farm, his truck does not have the best track record when it comes to reliability, but maybe he just got a Monday morning/Friday afternoon lemon.
My truck is what the local car salesman would call a Sally Rand. In other words, it's a stripper. It has no cruise, no tach, and it did not get the premium sound radio. (Meh, AM/FM is good enough for me and the cassette player of that era wouldn't be used and probably wouldn't work anymore)
I will also say I've been a Ford man my whole life and if the pickup in question had been an S10, I probably wouldn't have bought it, so take whatever I say with a grain of salt.
For your purchase, I'd say to just be patient and keep an eye out for a good deal. Any truck of that vintage will need a full amount of parts in the maintenance area.

 

[Joe_Power]

S-10. Trust me. You can thank me later.

 

[901Memphis]

Have you criss shopped the Mazda b series pickup?

 

[ram_man]

Ford ranger! The 2.3 is a great but gutless engine the 3.0 is a decent motor and the 4.0 is ok but prone to timing chain issues.

 

[Panzerman]

I can tell you I am a full size pick-up kind of guy and the last company I worked at gave us Ford Rangers, I was disgusted. They were fun trucks. They had the four cylinders, but were fun and spirited to drive. Got excellent fuel mileage and I ended up missing the little bugger when I finally got a F-150. When they took it off me, it had 275,000 and ran awesome with no oil use. I cant remember the year, I am going to say it was 2004-05.

 

[Panzerman]

Seriously though, unless your stuck on buying American. I would look for a Nissan. They don't hold the re-sale. as much as I like Rangers, they are going for stupid money since they quit making them Like the Winchester Model 94 guns. They were a dime a dozen till they quit making them and then everybody wanted one. Good trucks, but I would take a Dodge Dakota over one.

 

[carolina32]

I had a 92 ranger 5sp 2.3, and it was the most reliable vehicle I've ever owned. I kick myself daily for ever selling it.

 

[Clevy]

The 2.3 wasn't a powerhouse though could get them boosted.
With used vehicles the less power options the better,less to fail over the years. At this point brand isn't as important as how well it was maintained and duty cycle.
Be picky and wait for the perfect one

 

[01rangerxl]

It's hard to go wrong with any small truck that is priced right and in good condition. Don't get hung up on S-10 vs. Ranger...if it's clean and the price isn't crazy, go for it.

I personally like Rangers, and have never had an unreliable one, but the S-10 is good too. I could do just as much with S-10s, I just like Rangers more for subjective reasons (prefer the interior, suspension, etc.).

If you don't have a specific preference of make/model/configuration, try everything out that seems like it will be worth your time. Condition trumps everything with older used trucks unless you are after something specific.

 

[barkingspider]

Get the newest s10 u can, 4.3L v6, replace the intake manifold gasket and it'll run for ever. Ford rangers have been around forever so they should be OK too. I just prefer Chevy

 

[earlyre]

never owned either, but the Ranger has just always had a soft spot in my heart.

[censored] if money were no object, and i could buy/build any 2 vehicles i wanted to, they would be:
1) mid-late 90's Ranger,with a Vulcan, or swapped for either a 3.5 cyclone, or the new ecoboost 2.7 (all those engines are Locally made) basically a swap with the drive line of a current f150.

2) an early-mid 80's G-body olds, with the same ford powertrain as above.

no Ferrari's or Lambo's for this guy, the most exotic thing i want is a caterham.
but even then, it'd be the basic 160 model, the one with the skinny tires, and the 100hp 3cyl turbo diesel...
http://uk.caterhamcars.com/cars/seven-160

 

[hansj3]

I had an 89 Ranger with the 2.3 liter Lima motor. it was undoubtedly reliable. the only Dutchman was that it was a straight cab long box and there was maybe 200 pounds directly above the rear axle. Sandbags took care of that though. I bought it at an auction painted camouflage or something like 300 bucks and I should have kept the [censored] thing. it also got like 31 or 32 miles per gallon. a friend of mine found out that he can run e85 in his or so he claimed, he said that his must have been some sort of Argentine export....I always just thought that he was full of it.my girlfriend had an s10 and it was money pit... both were fun though. One of my jobs had newer rangers, 2.3 autos and they were fun... however I'd find a nice 90s Toyota Tacoma. Barring that a nissan frontier or aitsu or dodge mighty max/d50

 

[dishdude]

Both Ranger and S-10 are great vehicles. I prefer 4 cyl, 5 speed 2 wd combo with the upgraded interior. Both are simple to work on, reliable and parts are cheap and plentiful.

 

[slowdime]

I have to say I quite enjoyed my s10. The 2.2 was nearly bulletproof, after 97 or 98 at least.. earlier models ate head gaskets for lunch. If you do go for a 2.2 the manual trans makes it feel at least a little more powerful, but at the end of the day 120hp to push 3500 lbs ain't much. But nonetheless it was capable towing small trailers just fine. They're tough little trucks, and the bed is easy enough to remove to wire wheel and paint over rust.
I regret not buying mine back after the insurance writeoff!

 

[Texan4Life]

+1 don't forget to look at Mazda B series.

IIRC 1994-2010 are rebadged rangers.

 

[The_Jeff]

I had a 94 sonoma rustbucket, I bought it knowing it was.

It was fun, the 2.2 had a good axle ratio and it drove like the cavalier with the same motor.

If you've never had a "top loader" stick shift transmission with the stick directly connected to the guts, you've missed something in life. Very positive shifting.

I've also had 2wd dakotas, the 3.9s are hot rods and the 2.5 a dog. They're "just right sized" except the 3'10" between wheel wells in the box.

If any 4 cyl in a truck blows its head gasket you have tons of room to work.

 

[skyactiv]

I'd skip the S10. They have a following with scraggly guys that drink cheap beer and want something they can get parts for cheap at the AutoZone. It seems like the S10 with a leaky/loud exhaust is the favorite truck of the 3 AM trash picker where I live. Ford Ranger guys seem more civilized.