Of the 5 rangers I've owned one was an older style 89 2wd 4cyl/5sp then there was the 94 2wd 4cyl/5sp, 94 4wd 4.0/5sp, 99 (was 2wd 3.0/Auto) now 4wd 4.0/5r55e and the parts truck(98). The first ranger (89) sold me on rangers, ran good and good on gas. The second one was about the same only less power and newer body style(looked alot better). The 3.0 2wd I didn't drive much but seemed ok.
Now I have the two current rangers 94 and 99. Both are 4.0's, 4wd's, one stick one automatic. Although the 99 is newer and has more options the 94 has its advantages also. The 94 just plain rides better and runs just as good with the stick in spite of having 170,000 miles. The seats are more comfortable and has been a good ole truck.
Although I just finished the body swap on the 99 I have all the bugs worked out. I only have a couple minor things to do other than paint and wheels and have been driving it regularly. I have to admit it seems to have more power than the 94, first drive in the rain will prove that. She's a little squirly with the limited slip and 3:73's. What was ford thinking with the seats. The quality really went down hill. Although handling is good the suspension is alot stiffer than the 94 and makes it a rougher ride. I guess I really don't have a point just rambling about my observations. Anybody else notice differences in the different years?
John