Hello, I've been looking for a 2002+ 4.0L Ranger with manual transmission but I haven't had much luck yet. I found a pretty good deal on a 2000 4.0L with manual transmission and I wanted to know if I should go with a 2000 or stick with a 2002? I remember someone talking about how the 2002 Rangers are better than the 2000 but I can't remember why. Does anyone know the difference between the two? Thanks!

M

 

2000 4.0 is a different motor than the 02 4.0

 

yup.

 

Is that a bad thing?

 

nope...01+ 4.0s have more power due to them being OHC rather than pushrod

 

So the 2000 4.0L Ranger has timing chain instead of timing belt?

 

all v6 rangers have timing chains

 

I thought that OHV was 93-00, and a 4.0 OHC was introduced in 01 (which had the timing chain problem)

 

Ah, I did not know that. Thanks. If you find a deal on the 2000 Ranger 4.0L manual, would you hesitate to buy it?

 

hell no...the OHV 4.0 is a great motor

 

Case in point.
Mine just recently hit 175k. The only things that have been replaced:
Drivers side Valve cover (they tend to leak)
Lower intake gasket (they tend to fail after 17 years)
Plus a few things associated with a Lower intake job (passenger valve cover gasket, upper intake gasket)

The OHV motors were (still are) great was because the lower end (block and heads) are almost bullet proof. Solid Lifters (not hydraulic) won't ever fail you and there is less that can go wrong with something that old.

 

2000 Ford Ranger 4.0L, manual transmission, 2WD, two doors with 130k miles for $4200. Good deal?