Here’s an example of a truck with an engine option that we’ve only seen three times on Barn Finds. That doesn’t necessarily make them rare, but they don’t come up for sale all that often. This 1983 Ford Ranger Diesel is listed here on Facebook Marketplace in North Richland Hills, Texas and they’re asking $6,000. Here is the original listing, and thanks to Robert G. for the tip!
There’s something about the sound of a diesel that gets to me, even small ones in small trucks. For just four years, between 1983 and 1986, Ford offered Ranger buyers two different diesel engine options. The ’83 and ’84 Rangers had the option of having a Mazda (Perkins) diesel, which this one has. The ’85 and ’86 trucks could be had with a much more powerful Mitsubishi diesel engine.
The body on this Ranger looks perfect to me, I don’t see a flaw in it. This is a long-bed model and the diesel engine was only available on rear-wheel drive trucks, not on 4x4s. I’d lose the three other wheel trim rings, but that’s just me. I like the way it looks without one on that right-rear wheel. Hey, I wonder what the inside of the bed looks like? Here you go, it looks great, or at least for a 41-year-old truck.
Speaking of great, or not so much, the interior needs work. The dash appears pretty wavy and you can see the condition of the seat vinyl. That’s easy to fix, but maybe not the dash. This truck is so rare and appears so nice on the exterior that I’d want to bring it back to 1983 spec as much as possible. This Ranger has air-conditioning but it needs some fine-tuning. I’m guessing there’s quite a draw on the 59-hp diesel engine when the AC is on.
The big deal is the small diesel, in this case, a Mazda-built Perkins 2.2-liter inline-four with 59 horsepower and 90 lb-ft of torque when new. It sends power through a manual transmission to the rear wheels and this one has new parts but is said to need work to function as it should. It has a new injection pump but that needs to be dialed in, and it also has new glow plugs, an inline-fuel filter, and hoses. The tires are said to be two years old and the clutch master cylinder is a year old. The seller says it most likely needs new glow plugs (although they also say they’re new?) and needs some wiring between the starter and batteries (battery?). There are a lot of Barn Finds readers with diesel engine experience and I’m not one of them. Could you get this Ranger diesel humming like new again?
I’m trying to think of what kind of person would equip this truck with such a meager engine. 59 HP. in a 4,000 pound truck will garner VW performance, if lucky, and of all the Rangers I saw, not one had a diesel. I have a neighbor with one of these, has an astonishing 410,000 miles on a V6, never opened up. It appears the A/C AND P/S belt are missing, I’d have to think turning on the A/C alone would kill the motor. I’d bet my Jeep there was some remorse after delivery. Rangers were great trucks, and our “import killer”, as it were, but unfortunately, nothing we had could match the Asian trucks. Still, the Ranger has proven itself, just not with a diesel. Glow plugs,,,pfft, try those at 10 below,,uhp, uhp, uhp, no ether either, you’ll blow the head off.
I used to race a beautiful woman daily through King of Prussia PA who had one of these diesel Rangerss. My V-6 S-10 was just as slow. We’d be doing 70mph through section of Rt 202 until we’d get stuck behind a LANCE Box truck that barely did the speed limit and burned oil, making for a craphole ride to work. I once followed her but had to go to work sonI never knew who she was or where she was going.
Though my Dad always said he wanted one, I’ve still got to go with the wisdom that Mitsubishi had as the Tag line for their diesel pickup truck commercials: “It doesn’t matter what fuel economy your diesel pickup gets on the highway…if it can’t get on the highway.”
I seriously looked at a Spanish Jeep Commando that was for sale summer 2 years ago that was Perkins Powered. While it would do well driving in the small town that I’m moving to next year, getting in any of the Interstates in South Carolina, requires adequate torque to be 5 mph over the speed limit as you exit the “on ramp” to merge into the slow (right) lane of the interstate. No thanks. If I must have a diesel, I’ll try a Daimler-Benz OM-617, 3.0L, 5-cylinder Turbo diesel swap instead. At least it can get out of its own way.
Though they have long had a great reputation, my only experience with Perkins diesels was during harvest long ago running a Massey-Ferguson 510 combine. MF also offered a gas version (small block chevy V8), but the Perkins six had adequate torque and was bulletproof in our experience.
I think we have to look at the 59-hp and 90-lb/ft rating in the context of it’s time, mpg was paramount for many applications, and diesel was more efficient and also had a lower per gallon price back then. This truck wouldn’t have been something you wanted to pop on the freeway with, but would have had low operating cost and longevity for some applications.
By the way Mr. H, anecdotally I do have a ’20 diesel one ton that has glow plugs and has never failed, even down to -24 up here in the great white Nort’, and it has 316k on it already.
Spearfish, I recall the Perkins brand from marine use. A very popular fit in trawlers. And they had a solid reputation.
I assume you mean a 2020 diesel, and not 1920. I’m talking old Cat motors from the 60s, or reefer motors that hated the cold. Many times, in the cold, the glow plugs took all the juice, and it had better start, or out comes the “Schumacher”, standard issue for the north.
This Ranger looks solid on the exterior. I had no idea they ever even had a Perkins diesel available. ( or a Mitsubishi for that matter.)
I did a comparison ( I know this is apples to oranges but…. bear with me here.)
A Chevette diesel weighed between 2200 and 2300 pounds, the Isuzu diesel put out 51 pavement ripping horsepower and 72 ft. Pounds of driveshaft snapping torque. ( perhaps you can pick up on my subtle hint of sarcasm, its a gift.. and a curse all at the same time).
Now the Ranger was between 2500 and 2600 pounds ( not that much more) but had 59 horsepower and 90 ft. Pounds of torque. Now, notice, not so much the increase in HP but that there is a bit of a bump in torque. And everyone who has or has ever had a natually aspirated diesel knows that they are about lower rpm torque. That Perkins may not have done too bad a job moving it around. And….. If a Chevette diesel happened to pull up to me, in this Ranger, at a stop light, and wanted to drag race me for pink slips…. I think I just might take them on it, if…. ” My mill is runnin’ fine”.
This is a cool find, thank you for the write up Scotty and the research you did and yet another new thing I learned on Barnfinds today.
Me neither, didnt even know these had diesels. Thought it would be neat to learn about this engine, so im glad it got written about.
Loved my ‘87 Ranger 2.0 L4, which wasn’t much faster than this diesel. That Perkins will run forever, which is a good thing because forever is how long it takes to get somewhere. My ‘06 VW Beetle TDI that I’ve driven for 14 years and has 187K miles on the odo nods and waves in the direction of this old truck.
It was over 30 years ago at Big Lake a guy rolled up in an Escort with one of these diesels in it. Only one of those I had ever seen before or since. I wandered if it was factory as this guy was kind of a tinkerer and I believe it was factory now
I had an ‘84 Escort station wagon that had the Mazda diesel engine. (Remember Ford owned 50% of Mazda back then) That car got 60mpg around town with a load of kids and luggage and even better on the highway. It was a great machine but only had four seatbelts and when kid #3 came along it had to go – only to be replaced by a Caprice wagon/land yacht at the opposite end of the mileage spectrum. I still miss that Escort!
I presently have a 1984 Ford Escort with a diesel motor. I knew (and know) nothing about this motor. Didn’t even know Ford offered a diesel option on the Escort. Anyway, this one has sat out in the AZ desert for a number of years. I do plan on trying to get it running.
I worked for a company that had one. Definitely not a powerhouse, but phenomenal gas milage. Poor thing got the crap beat out of it and it keep on running. I also had a friend that had the same engine in an Escort, ran forever.
Guy I worked with gathered up old Rangers and if I remember right had 3, smoked like a chimney, ran the crap out of them! Perkins made a pile of engines, all sizes. During the ’70s gas crises a guy I knew put a 108ci out of a refer in a AMC Gremlin, guy he worked with put a 354 6cyl 120hp NA in a 68 F100
I had a 1986 Ranger with the Mitsubishi 2.3 Turbodiesel; consistently got over 28 mpg on the road with lots of power. At overhaul time I could not get parts as the Ford version was supposedly not the same as the engine that went into Mitsubishi trucks – this was 30 years ago.
“…they are about lower rpm torque. That Perkins may not have done too bad a job …” ergo – the supremacy of the thing.
The Perkins was a Brit company, possibly made the world over, but not by Mitsu. It is a renown plant and possible last use here was in the reffer industry for chiller power. 18 wheel road tractors had one up hi on the frnt of the trailer (“Thermo-King” clearly emblazoned on the plant) as they pulled, like a long 50 car train, into the Hadley Grass (asparagus) fields locally. Super fresh veg (cut, loaded into the truck just minutes later) on its way to Boston and NYC markets.
When re-powering my EB (70% off rd / 30% on rd) from the oe 170/2.8 I sought these ‘used’ as perfect size (4.236). No luck, stripped and shipped years earlier, I was too late for the magic ppl were still talkin bout 20, 30 yrs later. Did Cat produce these when buying the company? Not sure asa near equal came along quicker (ThriftPower i6 4.2) and rests in the bronk’s e. bay (w/truck 5 speed) today. Mericans dont speak diesel in automotive language…
https://www.perkins.com/en_GB/company/heritage/products.html
They’re missing out~
Will this truck go fast enough to stay up with traffic in the Dallas Fort Worth Metroplex?
I was watching Kojack on TV and saw a diesel powered Checker cab. I looked it up andvthey were a test and I think had Perkins Diesels and were too slow and they didn’t stick around. It sounds like if they could have made them faster, they’d last a lot longer in that kind of abuse, than a gas motor