1990-1992 Ford Ranger: Road Test

Even the small V6 is impressive, but the star performer is the 4.0-liter. Tossing out abundant torque, the 4.0 makes Ranger genuinely fun to drive. It's also a more practical hauler than the 2.9-liter V6, though the 2.9 and 3.0 are fine for light-duty work. The 4.0 liter engine does get rather growly when worked hard. Even a 4-cylinder Ranger is acceptable if you're using it mainly as a second car, though we strongly advise the 5-speed manual transmission with that smaller engine. Fuel economy could be a lot better. A 4.0-liter/automatic model averaged a mediocre 18.2 mpg. A regular-cab STX 4x4 with the 2.9 V6 and automatic did better: 19.5 mpg. Bench and bucket seats are both comfortable. But, a SuperCab's back seats are best suited for children. Instruments are functional, controls well-placed, though optional power window/door lock controls are too low and far forward on door panels. Cabin storage in regular-cab models is sparse, and only the XLT and STX have door map pockets. Wind noise and tire rumble (especially with the knobby 4x4 rubber) are apparent, but not obtrusive for a pickup. The ride is fairly comfortable, and road behavior typical of small trucks. Steering is a bit vague, the body leans readily in corners, and tires offer only moderate grip.

Value for the Money
With a Ranger, we're talking quality and refinement in a pleasant vehicle that's easy to live with. We'd put it first on our early '90s shopping list, but also take a close look at Ranger's closest competitors: the Chevrolet S10 and similar GMC Sonoma.