My 1993 Ranger Only has 120,000miles on it. the 2003 civic has 105,000 mi... So as far as the "Tired" thing goes..... they are similar.

I think a couple of you guys are looking way too deep into this. I was just concerned when I was going down the freeway, slightly uphill with the pedal to the floor and only doing 65-70 MPH. I had just replaced the clutch, I was hoping it was not slipping.... I guess in my mind I was thinking the 2.3 was half of a the 5.0... Which I have owned 2. one was in a F150, the other in a mustang. They always had ample power. Guess not.

And My ranger is a 5 speed. So it does have overdrive.

 

my 91 with 2.3L manual is fun around town and in my woods but on the highway, i get ran OVER!! i thought about doing a 2.3L turbo from a t-bird but i dont have the money to buy the engine from the junk yard! the only way to fix your problem is to put a loud speaker in your truck so you can yell at people, so much fun!!

 

displacement is not everything, a truck is meant to work, cars are more for play with us guys...i have a 87 rx7 and its a 1.3 liter turbo...and i bet u i can outrun any v6 ranger out there, but why, its a truck...want speed get a car, want something u can use everyday get a truck, and my 2.3 liter truck pulls my rx7 to the strip which is 60 miles each way and does fine...its jus old...give it some credit

 

i agree, my 2001 ranger with the 2.5L weighs in at about 3650 LBS with a full tank... i noticed the same thing when i sold my honda for the ranger, i thought how gutless it was, but i remembered how much heavier the truck was... and i'm getting better fuel economy in the ranger as opposed to the 2.2 in my accord

 

My 2008 Ford ranger 2.3l couldn’t do 65 miles hour down hill and wouldn’t got 90 miles on a tank of fuel pathetic