Do you see a difference? I know there are production variances, but my 2000 was tight as a virgin ***, while my 03

 

i own two 93's my XLT is one of the first rangers build in the 3rd gen's my Splash is one of the later one's and I can tell differences just from those 2 its odd

 

my 86 B2 was built like a tank... my 92 was too... my 02 is a great truck but i dont think its built (designed) as well as my gen I bronco II

 

haha...

 

i feel like its a peice of plastic sometimes

 

my 88 b2 was a damn tank as well ...... loved that truck ... my ranger doesnt seem as solid ... but is damn close!

 

My 93 4x4 Seems like its built much more solidly than my 02. I dont know why, but it just seems more durable. Like mentioned above, maybe its the addition of 50% Plastic? I mean, I know the 02 can stand up to just as much, but it seems more likely to break. Maybe its the suspension change that threw me off? TTB to IFS? Or just the companies cheapening up?

 

never owned another Ranger but my 96 nissan sure went through some mud holes pretty damn good..but nothin compared to the Ranger

 

Ive owned probably 10 I beam rangers over the years ,and this this is my first 98+. I really love the feel of the a frame suspension alot better,as far as quality,I had a 90 model 4cyl base,that was the best put together ranger I ever had.But overall Im very happy with my 02 .

 

Hey Man, i offered to take it off your hands earlier in the year, and I was serious too.

 

I had a 88b2200 and that was a beast. My G/f flipped it on its side, we pushed it back over (the cops came i got an infraction) and we started it up and when on our way. I think the newer rangers are comparable in build quality, obvioulsy there was less that could go wrong with the old 88 2wd then the new computer controlled 06 4wd.

 

lol. I still love her though

 

Yeah, I'd have to say my 92 Ranger XLT 2.3L Reg Cab LB, and compared to my 01 SC Edge....they stack up similarly. I would say my EDGE definatly has less interior quality to the seats and sound deadining, but build wise, both seem to be up to snuff. I always choose a no-option vehicle. WAY less electrical draw on the alternator, and less hassles down the road.

So far....I would have to complain about the ride quality of the Torsion beam suspension, the front end jars, compared to the softness of the TIB setup on ealier Rangers. Also, the tranny still has the same miss-shift/gear grind (due to driver error) quark that the ole' 92 had. Just one of those 'you get use to it" situations.

Build wise, I think the quality of both is pretty even. Everything is tight, works, fits well with little to no unrequired matinence due to factory defects.

So I would say I am very happy. Just wish I had a 4.10 in the rear......

 

my 92 is solid as concrete.. havent ever had an older one, i dont want one either! lol just playing...(not really)

 

wtf hahahaha




i guess im opposite then you all.
my 99 seemed cheaper then my 01.
but that a 2wd/ 4wd difference.
my 4x4 seems very sturdy and tough.

 

i think my 03 is alot better than my 92, but it was a 4cyl and 2wd, my new one is a 4.0 and 4x4 ext cab. both of mine have held up to alot of crap tho.

 

word

 

The door handles feel cheaper.... feels like I'm going to pull them off. The ones on my '96 Explorer were a lot more solid.

 

not taking traction and offroad ability due to 4x4 into consideration my 97 seemed way smoother offroad and creaked lots less compared to my 04. the truck was a tank and the stuff i did to it id be very afraid to do to my 04. However, i like the 04 way more. still a very tough truck.

 

You know what I like a lot more about my '03 vs my '84 and '91?

Spark plugs and wires go 100,000 miles instead of 15,000 miles on plugs, wires, cap, rotor, etc etc. Actually, it seems the change interval on everything has gone up, some just a little, some a whole lot.

They ditched the front 4wd hubs for CV joints so no more messing around with those things. The auto hubs sucked and the manual ones worked great but were an inconvinience.

I would agree there is a lot more plastic and lot less beefy parts on the newer vehicles. It's all about costs and weight so the cut everything they can. The only plastic on my '84 was the instrument cluster and the grill. Now half the truck is plastic.

 

Very disgruntle over my '02. Too many things going wrong or what not. My '00 was way better. Never a problem the two years I had it. Think this is my last Ranger.

 

My 87 was a cadillac when I first got it. The heater was amazing, the AC was amazing, The ride quality was amazing, The strength of the truck to go through everything I put it through over the years was spectacular. The motor on the other hand was just a 2.9L but it had over a quarter of a million miles on it and still ran as strong as the first day I got into it when I was 5. There is a big difference between trucks built back then and the ones built today. Back then, they were built to last. Now, they're built to be traded in it seems. I've had more problems with my 01 in the 3 years i've owned it then I had with my 87 in the 18 years it was in my family.

 

This is speaking with about two years with a 1994 Splash 4.0, 5-speed, Std Cab with 64,000 miles, and a brand new 2003 Level II FX4.

Overall, I believe the '94 to be built better, more solid and just "like a truck".

They were worlds apart, however. The Splash was a sporty ride with a 5-speed, wheras the Level II was a 4x4 with an auto. Both had the 4.0, one with the SOHC, one with the OHV variant.

I believe the SOHC engine to be far superior throughout the power band, yet the OHV had a tad more torque available...could have been the manual transmission making it feel that way.

Build quality -- I definately liked the interior on the 2003, as it was more creature comforty, and I never really had any interior problems. I never had any in the 1994, either...so I can't comment. The buttons, ***** and switches had a definate "click" on the '94, though. Kinda had to make sure you were where you wanted to be with the '03.

Shutting doors and tailgates.

I think that the '94 was a little 'tighter' in means of like, sealing out noise and wind...never had a leak on either truck. Shutting the tailgate is a thing I like to do. if it wobbles around when closed, vibrates, or just feels 'light', then I don't think I like that.

The '94 [once again] I think took the edge in the actual feeling of a "bam-and-latch" when closing the tailgate. The '03 didn't have problems, but maybe it was a lighter tailgate, or it was something to do with one being a step-side and the other not...who knows.

Like I said, I think the '94 took the cake, even after being older and used.

 

um yeh to add to my prior one my 97 never rolled the 04 floped right over n rolled back to its feet.

 

Wrong thread, genius.