It doesn’t get much more basic than this 1997 Ford Ranger XL pickup. We often hear from Barn Finds readers that they miss the days when a small, basic pickup was available, one without an overwhelming warranty-inducing nightmare of technology and touchscreens, and one with just two doors. The seller has this good-looking basic truck posted here on craigslist in Shoreline, Washington, and they’re asking $5,499. Here is the original listing.
Even the title is almost generic, this is just a small, basic truck, in Oxford White, the least flashy color available for the ’97 Ranger. It’s so basic that it only comes with three hubcaps! You should be able to locate a replacement for the missing right front wheel cap, and I’d probably do that, just to keep it looking smooth. The XL trim was the least fancy one for this era of the Ranger.
For the second generation of the Ranger, there was no base S trim level anymore, and this looks like it could have been a fleet truck in a former life. The second-generation Rangers (late-1992 for the 1993 model year until the end of 1997) eschewed (big word for a small truck) the S trim and went with a fancier name: XL. It wasn’t much different as you can see by the lack of really any ornamentation, graphics, trim, badges, etc. One thing that’s hard to miss is the paint condition inside the bed. The 1990s weren’t kind to white paint for some reason. My mom had a 1991 Dodge Spirit in white that started peeling like this.
It doesn’t get much more basic than this. A gray vinyl bench seat, roll-up windows, and a manual transmission. I wonder if a lot of us are really just remembering the good old days, or if we could actually live without all of the conveniences that we’re used to having in our vehicles now? This truck has a few little dings here and there, and flaking paint inside the bed, but the interior sure looks nice.
The clean engine is Ford’s 2.3-liter (yes, similar to what was in the Pinto) SOHC inline-four with 112 horsepower and 135 lb-ft of torque when new. Backed by the Mazda-sourced 5-speed manual transmission sending power to the rear wheels, here’s your chance to get a nice-looking, fairly inexpensive basic pickup. Are any of you ready to go back to the basics?
Good write-up Scotty. Here we have the fleet special of its day. I can see it being assigned to the water department guy, driving it around town fixing meters and such. I wonder the same thing, how many of us would miss our modern conveniences if we were to daily drive this. Anyhow, it looks to be in overall good condition. I do like the manual transmission and its long shifter.
I have such a truck – a 2015 Ecodiesel Ram. 2WD, crank windows, manual locks, mirrors, and seat, bench seat, steelies, no carpet, no auto-dimming rear view mirror, no back up camera, etc. The only options are Automatic, AC, Cruise Control, PS/PB and Sirius satellite radio. And I think that was all standard.
I got it used about 3 years ago. And I love it. VERY easy to live with, it just makes sense. Easy to get into and out of, and if you’ve been in a car any time in the last 75 years, you can figure out how everything works. You don’t need to read the owners manual to figure out how to open the door.
There are only a few things that I miss:
1. Power windows. Gotta say, I’ve got gorilla arms, and I can’t reach over to roll down the passenger window. And the number of times people will go to the passenger window to talk, and get grumpy when I can’t roll down the window (after all, what vehicle doesn’t have PW these days? It really is just that convenient.
2. 4wd. This is a pig in the snow. And just a little snow is a big problem.
3. (maybe) I don’t know if I’d go for a diesel again. The mileage is great – I’ve gotten 30 mpg before. It doesn’t stink or smoke like the old diesels. I’ve not had a problem starting it. But you really should plug it in the winter, and diesel fuel gels in the cold, and the emissions stuff is very finnicky, where you have to do a “regeneration” of the diesel particulate filter every so often.
This is in terrific condition considering its a base model no frills pickup. I like it. Personally, I’d leave it as is and just drive it and enjoy it. The 2.3 is a good motor, and a sweet shiftin Mazda 5 speed is a great combo too. I’m glad you wrote this up Scotty, I enjoyed it. Now….. back to shoveling some.snow.
I wouldn’t have the heart to modify it. You almost never see these base work trucks in this condition. But I would definitely make good use of it in terms of hauling things. But I think it deserves to be semi retired lol!
We got the cold in the Upper-Midwest, and you and Bob got the snow, Dave! Watch your backs while shoveling out there.
These are the best beaters ever made. They have a potential to last forever .
Of note, take a good look at any older truck, van or car painted white. They are peeling like a peel off of a banana. Chevrolet [GMC], Ford, Chrysler, Hyundai, Kia and most of the rest.
It is a major issue and no manufacturer is doing anything about it. It appears to be a bonding issue between the paint and the primer, for what ever reason. I recently saw a much later Silverado, a 2020, painted a beautiful steel grey-blue metallic color and it was beginning to peel off of the hood.
The car manufacturers know there is a problem but will probably do nothing until a class action suit is filed. Most of these vehicles paints’ begin to peel after the warranty expires, of course. Waters based paints are likely to blame but PPG and other paint suppliers can and should fix this.
Properly refinishing these vehicles would require a complete paint stripping and that cost would be exorbitant.
This should not be happening and in that past, when did anyone see factory applied paint peel off? Fade, yes..peel? Never.
That Ranger needs a bed liner and then it’s set…until the rest of the paint catches up. Lol
The condition is called “paint delamination”. And you are correct in the fact that to repair the paint correctly. The old excuse for paint needs to be stripped off. As most of you know by now. I’m a Ranger specialist. This and and the next year up are absolutely the best ever Rangers. 1999 was the last of the good ones. It will easily give you a lifetime worth of service. And if you really like your little truck to be peppy. Go to the wrecking yard and find a 4×4 Ranger and take the rear differential. In almost all cases it’s a traction lock with 3 73 gears. It just bolts on. If you find one that has the 3.0 engine. It is most likely a 4.10 traction lock. Read the diff. If the ratio lists a “L” in the middle of the ratio it is a traction lock. These lower gears really wake up the truck. And the fuel mileage hit is so small that you will not care. I have a daily driveronevwith the 3.73 conversion and it is a pleasure tob”rip through the gears”! cmgearsvwill notn tag cyou vwill ist
Someone told me white paint is the cheapest.. and thinnest, requires the least amount of paint to apply. So apparently its the manufacturers favorite. Not sure if this is true or nonsense. Love these basic, humble, vehicles like this Ranger. 👍
I think its about $2000 over priced considering its condition , the car fax shows its been rear ended Twice but they are nice little trucks
I agree. There are plenty of nice Rangers available for a lot less money.
Meh, my ex-old lady was rear-ended more than twice but she cost me a LOT more than 2000 bucks!
The reason why little no-frills trucks like this are adored by Barn Finds readers is because many of us grew up with them. Most of these are long gone due to rust, mileage, abuse and damage. The manufacturers will never build something like this again in this country due to your lovely federal government regulations and low profitability factor. Not to mention most young drivers will never be able to drive a manual trans anyway…they cant hold their stupid phone in their face while shifting!
And I’ll not buy a new conventional truck for just that reason. Although I am looking at the small electric ones.
I paid $ 7,995 for a new Ranger equipped just like this one.It was a 93′ though .After 5 years I traded it for a 98′ 4 cyl.auto with air and then traded that for my last,a 03′ Edge stepside
V-6,auto and air.
In 1996 I purchased a Toyota Tacoma new for $11,000. A similar basic no AC, no radio, wind up windows, five speed manual, four cylinder. I still have it, a daily driver, nothing except some plastic door handles has ever broken or needed replacement. The inflation calculator indicates the $11,000 purchase price in 2026 would be $23,000. There is no truck available new for $23,000.
This looks like a nice basic Ranger, a little expensive in my opinion.
I bought a 99 Ranger w/53,000 miles just like this one for $1700.00 last year. Same engine/trans and color. Body is not as nice as this one, numerous dents on box but with nice interior. It runs great and had new tires. It is my daily driver now.
I also have a 94 with 250,000 plus miles on it that I bought new, same basic truck. Only major repair was a clutch and brakes. I am going to rebuild its engine this summer.
I also have a 2004 extended 4×4 w/4.0L V6/auto that I bought new. It has 95,000 miles on it and is stored inside except for when it snows or is really hot in summer, it has AC.
I have had very good experiences with Ranger Trucks. Don’t think I will buy another new one, too many extra unnecessary things to go wrong.
I bought my 95 Mazda B2300 (the same truck as this one) in 2010 with about 93K for $2000. The maroon paint still shines nicely; the A/C blows cold; I get about 23mpg on the highway. It’s a very comfortable truck to drive, even with the heavy duty tires I put on it and the helper springs in the back. The only problem is that the engine is quite underpowered. I keep looking for a very used B3000/4000/Ranger to use the V6 engine (and hopefully PW/PLs). No luck so far. I’d happily rebuild the V6 if needed because otherwise the truck has been great. 160K now. My son steals it all the time because he likes it too, despite all of his other trucks.
I owned this truck, well, one identical to it – same year, 4 cylinder, 5 speed, basic entry level trim. Also had a couple of other Rangers, both 6 cylinder with automatics. They were delivery vehicles for my business and the 4 cylinder was my favorite, but my drivers preferred the ones with the automatics. I kept the 4 cylinder after we sold the business, my daughter took it to college with her for a while and we eventually traded it in with just under 200K on the clock. It was still going strong (with the original clutch!) – probably still out there somewhere – great truck!
the 2.3 litre in my 2001 is DOHC. I bought it as a retired parts house truck with 138,000 miles on it, It now has 360,000 miles. I’ll replace it with another one if it ever lays down
I had a 1995 POS version of this and I loved it to death and miss it desperately. For the love of everything sacred we need pick up trucks this size again. I’ll but 10! I promise.
Ive owned 3 of these with the 2.3/2.5 and a stick. One was destroyed by a mechanic’s stupidity. One was over 350k when I sold it. It lived for a few more years I still have its replacement, which has over 250k, though I’m not currently driving it. I love these rubber floor mat specials. Had a 4WD with the 3.0 V6 and Supercab with the Splash package. I paid way more money, had more problems, and just didn’t like driving it.
I had one and it is so underpowered it could barely pass, while going downhill and under towing capacity, it said “not recommended”.
My main vehicle, after my motorcycles, is a 1998 Nissan King Cab, 4 cylinder, 5 speed, without power locks or power windows. It does have power steering and AC though. It works just fine for hauling duties, running around town and for road trips. It easily cruises at 75-80 and gets up to 28 mpg. The clutch pedal is light, so it’s easy to drive, even in stop and go traffic on I5 though Portland. You (at least I) really don’t need all the crap offered on modern vehicles, although I sometimes appreciate the heated seats in my wife’s car, and always enjoy the sunroof.
The condition is called “paint delamination”. And you are correct in the fact that to repair the paint correctly. The old excuse for paint needs to be stripped off. As most of you know by now. I’m a Ranger specialist. This and and the next year up are absolutely the best ever Rangers. 1999 was the last of the good ones. It will easily give you a lifetime worth of service. And if you really like your little truck to be peppy. Go to the wrecking yard and find a 4×4 Ranger and take the rear differential. In almost all cases it’s a traction lock with 3 73 gears. It just bolts on. If you find one that has the 3.0 engine. It is most likely a 4.10 traction lock. Read the diff. If the ratio lists a “L” in the middle of the ratio it is a traction lock. These lower gears really wake up the truck. And the fuel mileage hit is so small that you will not care. I have a daily driveronevwith the 3.73 conversion and it is a pleasure tob”rip through the gears”! cmgearsvwill notn tag cyou vwill ist
The condition is called “paint delamination”. And you are correct in the fact that to repair the paint correctly. The old excuse for paint needs to be stripped off. As most of you know by now. I’m a Ranger specialist. This and and the next year up are absolutely the best ever Rangers. 1999 was the last of the good ones. It will easily give you a lifetime worth of service. And if you really like your little truck to be peppy. Go to the wrecking yard and find a 4×4 Ranger and take the rear differential. In almost all cases it’s a traction lock with 3 73 gears. It just bolts on. If you find one that has the 3.0 engine. It is most likely a 4.10 traction lock. Read the diff. If the ratio lists a “L” in the middle of the ratio it is a traction lock. These lower gears really wake up the truck. And the fuel mileage hit is so small that you will not care. I have a daily driveronevwith the 3.73 conversion and it is a pleasure to”rip through the gears”!
great lill rig esp w/the 2.4. Love the Lima esp w/a weber 32/36 (progressive). We even put the ‘D’ shaped port head those have on other Limas for an upgrade.
This one’s fine but the larger cab and 4WD/mazda5 would B ideal for this place. Rust converter (corroseal?) to the bed, @ side rail a bed cover (or some direct bed protector). We also power wash, dry & use lanolin or wax based undercoat for chassy longevity. Year after yr. No thing better for here:
sno proof, right-sized utility (& my preference/ford or toy), MPGs, durability,
low maintenance, maneuverable/tight spaces, able to do any lill woods or yard wrk we need…
I have a ’99 basic Ranger in equal condition to the one listed here. Currently 198,00 miles. Great little truck. It is my winter (MI) driver. the ONLY options are air and you get a dinger bell if you open the door with the lights still on. I love it.
It may be considered overpriced by some, but at 110K, this has a lot of life left. No doubt that the next owner will get plenty back from their investment.
I have a 1998 ford ranger. It has the 2.5L inline 4 cylinder with dual spark plugs per cylinder with a 5 speed manual transmission and it has a 7 foot bed. I just need to find time to get it running
I have the Same truck. Runs great 160000. Miles. I find I need to clean the mass flow sensor now when it runs rough.