Ride difference on Road between off road and Sport

I noticed a huge difference from my SR5 to my off road. long rides feel better for me in my mushy off road

 

I've had both. The OR is considerably softer on road.

 

When I first got the new tires installed 275 70 17 they had 45 lb them I'm now down to about 32 which is better but not great

 

man i used to have one. An '03 with the torsion bars. Rode like crap, but it looked pretty good for what it was. Everything started to grenade at 150k miles, drivetrain was completely falling apart and it wouldn't get out of its own way

 

I’ve had two of those, a 14 and an 04, got 22 years service and over 700k miles between the two trucks. No complaints here.

 

Interesting. I had the opposite experience. Got my 07 ranger with about 40k miles and sold it at 165k miles, thing still drove and looked like new. 4.0 wasn’t bad, but the biggest problem was fuel economy.

The only things I’ve replaced were: 2 thermostat housings, starter, AIC valve and that’s pretty much it. The rest is regular maintenance, brakes, fluids etc.

It was very reliable vehicle for me and I wish I could’ve kept it. I still miss it dearly.

Bought it for 13500 and sold it for 8500 7 years later, I did very well with that little guy.

 

yours had the 3.0?

 

yea the 4.0 was the motor to get. That or the 4 cylinder. Both pretty good engines. The 3.0 sucked tho

 

Yes, the duratec 4 banger was on par with Toyota quality 4 bangers IMHO. Very slow but very reliable.

From what I read online and Ford ranger forums, Vulcan 3.0 was very slow but reliable. Maybe you just got unlucky? Who knows. Or maybe I’m just very wrong.

 

Tires also can effect the ride quality. Info only here. The BFGs are most popular tires for off roaders today.
When I started buying the BFGs in the 80’s , they perform very well. I decide my next set of tires I tried the Goodyear Wrangler s, two flats ,damages side walls, never again.

BFG’s est 1870 , BFGs guarantee tire uniformity on the first 25% wear, also a 6 year on materials and workmanship, free replacement on the first year or 25% wear. New BGS KO2s 10% more traction on mud ,19% more traction on snow.

The KO2s are the fourth generation, the sidewalls rubber compound is twice as thick. With reinforced w/ nylon call Tri-guard.

Ratings for BFGs. C , D , E. If you own the BFGs with the C ratings before and replace them with the new E , ratings , you will feel the difference in your rides. The. E ratings will offer a stiffer ride.

Tire sidewall ratings will effect the comfort , when driving.

 

Ford Rangers the 4.0 was a OK engine, the 3.0 was consider indestructible, long lasting engine , goes and goes,
But 3.0 lack too much HP. I still have my 1999 Ford Ranger, farm truck now, w/ the 3.0. Factory limited slip. 2 inch lift. Had the rear end rebuilt, new cutches in the limited slip.

Off roading it handles very well, on the lava shoreline trails, took me everywhere! Sand , rock crawling, etc.

 

My Dad had one with the 3.0 and another with the 4 banger, both were good trucks. While reliable, the 3.0 was kinda strange as it felt underpowered and yet had bad fuel economy.

 

im glad yall had good luck with them! mine never idled right, always rough. Turned out to be bad heads. Glad to be in a yota now, for sure

 

Yes. 3.0 was very underpowered and had the fuel economy of a 4.0. Strange engine indeed. It was more reliable than the 4.0 though, which had 3 timing chains and plastic cassettes.

 

1999 Ford Ranger extra cab, 3.0 31” BFG. Farm truck (not license). Just put on new tires too.
The plant with the big leaves is call Ti leaf, back is banana trees , in between is coffee trees.

 

If it comfortable ride quality you're looking for then get a Chevy! Best riding truck I ever owned! Too bad it was built like A$$!

Either truck will be crappy!
Sport is stiff for better cornering and street handling (Yet still drives like a Brick) and OR is progressive and softer to allow the suspension to articulate Off-Road and is prone to nose dives on hard braking.
Hey it's a Truck!
I personally think the tires and set up makes a bigger difference on the ride quality then the suspension. Brand, style, air pressure and alignment settings all play a big role in ride and drivability.

 

A picture of a coffee tree hanging sideways with the green bean and a few ripe coffee beans (red), mostly likey in a month or two , we will start the first round of picking. All pick by hand, each individual bean is pick off.
Season is usually from Aug to Dec and can go longer.
Peak season you can scoop / rake off the branched. Peak season up to 400lbs or more per person.
We get paid by the pound.

 

Funny, I knew you were in BC as soon as I saw the first overcast picture!

I had a Mazda B2300 (base Ford Ranger with rear window slider, carpet, cd player and different bed design.) I owned it for over 100,000kms, and sold it with 230,000km's on it. the only thing I had replaced were front brakes, a starter, and a battery. And a very hard to diagnose faulty tip over fuel pump shut off.Yes, it was 2wd, but it also got 32+ MPG, and was pretty enjoyable to drive. A very solid, dependable enginge that was easy to work on. No hate here for the (not current gen Ford Ranger.

 

Haha! Yep good ol rainy BC.

Did you upgrade rear leafs? That thing must’ve been extremely slow with all that weight. The 2.3 had like 115 hp and 130 tq I believe.

 

I added Firestone Ride Rite Air bags, and bolted camper mounts to the frame. The camper w/o jacks was just under 700lbs. I could actually stay within GVWR, which because it was the manual transmission/ non ac model, was about 250lbs less than my buddies loaded Tundra!
Early rangers had the anaemic but decent 2.0 or 2.3 liter engine from the Pinto and Fox body cars from the 70'/80's, which was stroked out to 2.5 liters for 1998-2001. The engine was redesigned for 2001 and improved for 2002 for the 2003.5 model year. The 4 cylinder was updated with an aluminum block and DOHC making 143hp and 154ft./lb of torque.
The base non AC models were under 3000lbs for the manual, so they had ample if not tire smoking power. IIRC, the engine was a joint engineering exercise between Ford and Mazda. The truck engine had a really heavy flywheel.
I wish Ford had made a regular cab Ranger 4cylinder 4x4 with the engine. I'd probably still own it. What I really regret is selling the camper....