Second Gen Ford Explorer/Ranger Appreciation Thread

Nothing.

>>16423668
OHV V8 + torque converter = envy of the world

File: IMG_0329.jpg (762KB, 1694x1270px) Image search: [Google]

762KB, 1694x1270px

>>16423668
My 95 4.0 V6 XLT (oxford white) retired with over 220k miles on the original engine. Too bad the transmission was a piece of shit, thank god for ATRA warranties. That truck had the comfiest seats. The fucking rear seats could recline. I drove that beat rom LA to Alaska where it spent 3 winters and started every single morning.

Currently driving a 99 5.0 Limited. It has 112k miles and I intend on driving it when it hits 200k. The seats arent as comfy as my 95's and I dont care for the suburban mom pearl white but hey at least the transmission is solid.

those are pieces of shits

>>16423803
Fuck off, GM cuck

>>16423803
Then why are there so many of them still on the road?

>>16423808
>Defending the exploder

No. Just no.

>>16423820
I havent seen many on the road since the mid 2000s

the one you do see are like what on their 3rd transmission now

File: rangers.jpg (886KB, 4320x2432px) Image search: [Google]

886KB, 4320x2432px

The second gen ranger is the preferred truck of the waterfront. super rugged and durable pickups.

>>16423668

if i wanted to put a diesel in my 88' Ranger, what are my options?

>>16423933

put it in or dont

the 1st and 2nd generation explorer are literally SUVs perfected. only the bronco can compete

>first REAL suv
>based on the god tier ranger platform
>1st generation had god tier i-beam/TTB
>2nd generation had proven IFS and 8.8 rear
>solid motors

they are fucking amazing, and not a day goes by that i dont miss my 1997

>>16423668
>What went right?
Only like 20% of them were totaled in a rollover

>>16423975
What is IFS? Independent something suspension?

>>16425730
Front maybe.

>what went right
that ford put the best factory heads of any windsor motor onto them for some reason.