The Money Mustache Community

Learning, Sharing, and Teaching => Ask a Mustachian => Topic started by: sdt1890 on July 09, 2017, 10:11:51 PM

Title: Thoughts on this Ford Ranger
Post by: sdt1890 on July 09, 2017, 10:11:51 PM
 2000 Ford ranger xlt ext cab 4x4 off road step side low miles - $2900 (St Ann)

Looking for a cheap basic truck and this one seems to be priced right. Certainly not a new truck, but with new tires and allegedly only 50,000 miles, doesn't seem like a bad price. My parents had a Ranger growing up and it has a place as a basic truck. Any opinions from fellow Mustachians?
Title: Re: Thoughts on this Ford Ranger
Post by: sdt1890 on July 09, 2017, 10:18:29 PM
https://stlouis.craigslist.org/cto/6210661350.html

Guess posting the link would help
Title: Re: Thoughts on this Ford Ranger
Post by: MommyCake on July 10, 2017, 04:45:23 AM
I really like the Ford Ranger.  They sell fast in my area, especially the 4x4 ones.... I would get this before anyone else comes along, it seems to be a great deal.  Low miles, clean, 4x4, what more can you ask for?  and since they're calling themselves elderly people I would image they were not hard on the vehicle and maintained it well.  My vote.. go for it
Title: Re: Thoughts on this Ford Ranger
Post by: Fishindude on July 10, 2017, 07:47:37 AM
I've owned a few Rangers.
They are small and gas mileage is unimpressive.   I'd opt for a half ton truck as you would have a lot more to choose from, more room, and mileage wouldn't suffer much.
Title: Re: Thoughts on this Ford Ranger
Post by: WranglerBowman on July 10, 2017, 10:19:47 AM
I'm guessing this truck has the 3.0 V6?  Don't know very much about that engine but I do know that Rangers have a pretty good track record and parts are cheap and available everywhere.  If it only has 50k miles and their isn't much corrosion on the truck I would go for it.  If maintained properly that truck should last you a while.  Like others have said though you could get a bigger truck with similar mpg's that would have a better utilitarian service...
Title: Re: Thoughts on this Ford Ranger
Post by: radram on July 10, 2017, 10:30:39 AM
For its age, it is slightly overpriced for my area (WI), but with so few miles it would be worth a premium price. The extended cab would be enough for me to pull the trigger.

Keep us posted.
Title: Re: Thoughts on this Ford Ranger
Post by: apricity22 on July 10, 2017, 10:43:29 AM
I had a 1995 Ford Ranger up until about 2011. I loved it. I would probably still have it if it hadn't been rear ended and totaled. Great little truck that got decent gas mileage IMO.
Title: Re: Thoughts on this Ford Ranger
Post by: ChpBstrd on July 10, 2017, 11:45:11 AM
The weak points on Fords are the automatic transmissions. But at 50k miles and 2900, I'd take the chance. Just change the fluid as soon as you get it.

Also, check that it has the correct color antifreeze. I believe these take the orange kind and if the PO put in green you'll have corrosion inside the engine and head gaskets. Might have that backward so check the manual.

Look closely at the seats and gas pedal for wear that might indicate actual mileage is 150k! Sniff test the carpet for signs of flooding or smoking.

Expect 16-20mpg, which is less than F150s get these days. However, with depreciation near zero it could be an economical work truck. Just not a long range commuter.
Title: Re: Thoughts on this Ford Ranger
Post by: bobechs on July 10, 2017, 12:28:55 PM
The weak points on Fords are the automatic transmissions. But at 50k miles and 2900, I'd take the chance. Just change the fluid as soon as you get it.

Also, check that it has the correct color antifreeze. I believe these take the orange kind and if the PO put in green you'll have corrosion inside the engine and head gaskets. Might have that backward so check the manual.

Look closely at the seats and gas pedal for wear that might indicate actual mileage is 150k! Sniff test the carpet for signs of flooding or smoking.

Expect 16-20mpg, which is less than F150s get these days. However, with depreciation near zero it could be an economical work truck. Just not a long range commuter.

Wouldn't it be handier to just read the miles off the odometer?

This is not a pre-1994 model. According to the OP it is a 2000, well past the change to 6 main digit odos.

Unless maybe you think the year model has been faked up.  That would be a lot of work to trick a buyer re mileage.
Title: Re: Thoughts on this Ford Ranger
Post by: Cowardly Toaster on July 10, 2017, 12:44:27 PM
Rangers are great little trucks. There gas mileage on V6s isn't great but that doesn't tell the whole story. They're reliable and maneuverable. Also, parts are cheap and widely available.
Title: Re: Thoughts on this Ford Ranger
Post by: Debts_of_Despair on July 10, 2017, 12:49:37 PM
The 4.0 V6 would be much preferred over the 3.0.  They both get the same poor mileage but the 3.0 is gutless, especially when dragging around an auto tranny and 4WD.  Seems like a good deal either way.
Title: Re: Thoughts on this Ford Ranger
Post by: CmFtns on July 10, 2017, 01:03:56 PM
That is a very tempting combination of exterior and interior condition, mileage, and price in my opinion.

I do love me some manual transmission though and personally would wait till I could find that but i'm probably the minority on that.
Title: Re: Thoughts on this Ford Ranger
Post by: ChpBstrd on July 10, 2017, 01:35:16 PM
The weak points on Fords are the automatic transmissions. But at 50k miles and 2900, I'd take the chance. Just change the fluid as soon as you get it.

Also, check that it has the correct color antifreeze. I believe these take the orange kind and if the PO put in green you'll have corrosion inside the engine and head gaskets. Might have that backward so check the manual.

Look closely at the seats and gas pedal for wear that might indicate actual mileage is 150k! Sniff test the carpet for signs of flooding or smoking.

Expect 16-20mpg, which is less than F150s get these days. However, with depreciation near zero it could be an economical work truck. Just not a long range commuter.

Wouldn't it be handier to just read the miles off the odometer?

This is not a pre-1994 model. According to the OP it is a 2000, well past the change to 6 main digit odos.

Unless maybe you think the year model has been faked up.  That would be a lot of work to trick a buyer re mileage.

In my experience, people regularly miss or add a digit on prices and mileage in CL ads. I've even.seen 5-digit year models.
Title: Re: Thoughts on this Ford Ranger
Post by: WSUCoug1994 on July 10, 2017, 01:41:41 PM
Side step beds have much less space - that is a deal killer for me.
Title: Re: Thoughts on this Ford Ranger
Post by: v8rx7guy on July 10, 2017, 01:59:02 PM
I've owned 4 Rangers.  This seems like a nice deal for me, especially with 50K miles.  Get a carfax on it to make sure there's no odometer fraud.  Also bring it to a mechanic prior to purchase to make sure it is in good mechanical condition.
Title: Re: Thoughts on this Ford Ranger
Post by: Debts_of_Despair on July 10, 2017, 03:02:26 PM

Look closely at the seats and gas pedal for wear that might indicate actual mileage is 150k! Sniff test the carpet for signs of flooding or smoking.

The ad says the owner is elderly.  Obviously the buyer needs to do their due diligence but is seems reasonable for an older person to drive a limited amount of miles.
Title: Re: Thoughts on this Ford Ranger
Post by: Cowardly Toaster on July 10, 2017, 03:30:42 PM
Side step beds have much less space - that is a deal killer for me.

Wouldn't be too hard to get a little flat bed on one, that would be pretty neat. As long as you were careful not to overload it.
Title: Re: Thoughts on this Ford Ranger
Post by: Reynolds531 on July 10, 2017, 04:07:51 PM
Thread makes me miss my Mazda b3000 Ranger clone.
Title: Re: Thoughts on this Ford Ranger
Post by: iris lily on July 11, 2017, 10:45:18 AM
Someone rear ended DH's 2010 Ford Ranger last fall. It was "totaled" by the insurance company but because Rangers are hard to find and popular, we kept it and fixed it. No regrets.

I have triend to talk DH into a bigger truck but he likes the bed height of the Ramger. Prior to that, he had a. Ssion hardbody (small truck) for about 20 years.