Martinjmpr
Wiffleball Batter
I'm about to put the little Mazda up for sale. Nothing wrong with her, just decided I want something a little different.
I've always liked the basic, unadorned simplicity of a small, regular cab truck with a 4 cyl and a 5 speed MT. No CV joints (unless they have them in the driveshaft?), no transaxle, no T-case, no vacuum operated hubs, just engine, transmission, axle, like Henry Ford intended.
Anyway, having previously owned a Ranger (99 4x2 Ex cab, 3.0, 5 speed) and having ~$3500-$4k to spend, I'm thinking the best candidate would be a 94 -up Ranger or Mazda B2300/2500.
So are there any known weaknesses or possible problem areas? Any reason to prefer the 2.5l (1998 - up) to the 2.3 (94-97?) I know the biggest difference between the earlier and later ones is the suspension: Twin I beam on the early ones and double wishbone on the later. My 99 had the double wishbone and seemed to handle fine.
I have to say, I kind of prefer the Mazdas, they just look a little nicer and seem to be less abused than the Rangers.
My only "requirements" are that it has to have 4 cyl, manual and AC (sorry, I lived long enough without AC, I'm not going back!)
This will be my DD/around town vehicle and possibly a light or short-range camping vehicle. I assume I won't have any problems pulling a small (1,000lb loaded) trailer even with the 4 cyl?
Thanks in advance for any input! :ylsmoke:
I've always liked the basic, unadorned simplicity of a small, regular cab truck with a 4 cyl and a 5 speed MT. No CV joints (unless they have them in the driveshaft?), no transaxle, no T-case, no vacuum operated hubs, just engine, transmission, axle, like Henry Ford intended.
Anyway, having previously owned a Ranger (99 4x2 Ex cab, 3.0, 5 speed) and having ~$3500-$4k to spend, I'm thinking the best candidate would be a 94 -up Ranger or Mazda B2300/2500.
So are there any known weaknesses or possible problem areas? Any reason to prefer the 2.5l (1998 - up) to the 2.3 (94-97?) I know the biggest difference between the earlier and later ones is the suspension: Twin I beam on the early ones and double wishbone on the later. My 99 had the double wishbone and seemed to handle fine.
I have to say, I kind of prefer the Mazdas, they just look a little nicer and seem to be less abused than the Rangers.
My only "requirements" are that it has to have 4 cyl, manual and AC (sorry, I lived long enough without AC, I'm not going back!)
This will be my DD/around town vehicle and possibly a light or short-range camping vehicle. I assume I won't have any problems pulling a small (1,000lb loaded) trailer even with the 4 cyl?
Thanks in advance for any input! :ylsmoke: