Wow, this is one nice Ranger! Just to get it out of the way right off the bat, yes, it’s been repainted, but it’s said to be a rust-free New Mexico truck, and someone spent a ton of money on this little hauler to make it this nice. The seller has this 1985 Ford Ranger posted here on craigslist in Alexandria, Minnesota, and they’re asking $12,000. Here is the original listing.
I got super excited when I saw that opening photo, thinking that we’d finally see some great images in a craigslist ad. And we do, for the most part, but out of seven exterior photos, the seller doesn’t show one square inch of the passenger side at all; nothing. I don’t understand that, and I know it was in the shade, but dang. Otherwise, they have included many nice photos in this listing. This wraparound front bumper makes me think this isn’t a Standard/base Ranger; those had black bumpers. It could be an XL trim Ranger, but there are no badges, unless they were taken off during the repaint. The first-generation Ranger was made from 1981 for the 1982 model year until the end of 1992. This one is wearing optional cast aluminum wheels, nice.
This truck looks ready for Pebble Beach. Our friend, Bob_in_TN, is a Concours Mustang judge, and he knows a lot about Fords, in general, too. Bob and the other Ford experts here may be able to pick out details that aren’t 100% factory-correct. This one is wearing Ford Ranger’s “Deluxe Two-Tone Paint” in colors that I don’t see in Ranger brochures, but the seller says they’re Ford colors. I don’t see “Cream” on this Ford paint listing, but Ember appears to be from a 1978 Ford. Whatever Ford they’re from, they’re beautiful, as was the condition of this Ranger before it was repainted, according to the seller. Here’s what the bed looks like.
In looking at the interior and gauge cluster, this appears to be either a Standard Ranger or an XLS, both of those trim levels had the “brushed pewter-tone cluster applique”, as seen here. The XL and XLT had woodgrain, and this one doesn’t. It would have also had a leather-wrapped steering wheel, but you can see this one has been changed to a nice aftermarket wheel. You can also see that this truck has an automatic rather than a manual transmission. The diamond-pattern seat and door panel fabric isn’t anything Ford would have offered. I think this may be a Standard Ranger that was upgraded with chrome bumpers and a much nicer interior, even though it would have had black rubber flooring. The XLS had a black grille, bumpers, and trim. I need a drink. A VIN would have been handy here. Page 10 of this brochure lists the interior features; this one has a little bit of everything.
The engine compartment doesn’t appear to be up to the same cosmetic standard as the rest of the truck, but it doesn’t look that bad. This is a 2.8-liter OHV V6 with 115 horsepower and 150 lb-ft of torque. Backed by an automatic transmission sending power to the rear wheels only, they say it has an oil leak toward the front of the engine, the speedometer cable needs to be lubed to get rid of a squeak, and the following parts were replaced: “Front & rear shocks, gas tank vent seals, power steering pump, rebuilt carburetor, plugs & wires, battery, starter, fuel pump, ignition module, radiator & hoses, fuel tank switching valve (OEM), engine valve stem seals, transmission shift shaft seal, transmission fluid & filter.” It also has two gas tanks. What model is this Ranger? My guess is that it’s a base model with different bumpers and a fancier interior. Bob, help!
Thanks for the kind words Scotty. Yes I’m a Ford guy, have been since I was a kid. And a Mustang guy, Foxes especially. But otherwise, I think you are giving me more credit than I deserve. I know a tidbit here and a tidbit there on a variety of Ford products, but I don’t consider myself much of an expert on any of them.
Back to this Ranger…. it is very nice. Clean and attractive. Obviously (for example the interior) isn’t stock, which makes me believe it could be as you suspect a mix and match of other items, based on the owner’s preferences. A Marti Report would help. Hopefully others will chime in with info.
Stock or not, whoever worked on this Ranger really did a top notch job. If Ford didnt offer this color combination in 1985, they sure should have. I love it. Rims and all, its a nice package. That bed is amazing too . And the price, I think its very reasonable considering the overall condition of this little truck. I’m with Scotty, I always look forward to Bob_In_Tns insight on Fords. I always learn something new. And like hearing his personal connections to different vehicles. If this was indeed a base model that 6 and an automatic was a nice addition to a base model. Nice find here here Scotty, I enjoyed your write up, and this Ranger. ( and Bob too lol) -Dave
Had no idea Rangers could come equipped w 2 fuel tanks.
Yesan option only the long beds had. dg8ger
I know I ruffle a couple feathers here, keeps you on your toes, but more accurately, I say things many folks don’t want to hear. Too bad, it’s a public forum, and I pay to be heard,,:), take this truck for example. Many, including the author know I bleed red, white, and BLUE, and how imports, um, changed our world, but why in t’arnation would someone buy a foreign truck, when this was available? It did everything the Asian trucks did, and cheaper, I might add. I have a neighbor that has an extra cab Ranger like this, has an astonishing 420K on the V6, never been opened up. I’m certainly not alone hoping Ford would reintroduce the 1985 Ranger again, but good luck there. Great trucks, and clearly “dad” loved his Ranger well into retirement. Someone scarfed up a heck of a find here.
Great write up Scotty, seems like you researched this handsome truck like an author writing a book. My favorite barn finders have chimed in also. Looking forward to more comments on this one. As a Toyota guy I still can’t answer Howard’s question as to why anyone would buy an import over this one.
drove my ranger diesel till there was no body left to rust
Still have my Mazda (Ranger) B2200 Perkins diesel, quietly sitting in the woods, converting to rust.
As a geezer I have owned Fords, Chevys, Olds, Pontiac, Nissan, Toyota, Volvo etc. I bleed red, white & blue but am thankful for the impact that imports had on our domestic car makers. Quality improved dramatically as a result.
I now own a Toyota and Subaru. I would rather drive a 1969 Pontiac Safari wagon with the 455 but can’t afford the premium gas required. I read BF daily and love to hear the stories. Keep them coming.
Well the hood hinges and firewall are a tan color. I wonder if it was actually a totally different color then it is now. Regardless it is very nice and if was originally tan, they did a fantastic job on the repaint.
Had an ’88, same miles as this, not quite as nice as this, but still very clean. 2.9 EFI, new tires, 50k on a rebuilt trans. Sold it to a guy for $1500 with a water leak between the block and timing cover, could have fixed it myself cheap and easy but I just wanted it gone.
I have refurbished approximately 20 Ranger trucks. NOTHING more reliable than a 4 cylinder Ranger with a manual transmission. I even have a Ranger reputation where people will put in their order for a rust free truck and wait for me to find the configuration they want and then go through it. One “customer” in Illinois ordered 2 4X4s. One for him and one for his wife. (Currently have 3 waiting) The only thing that the new owner needs to be aware of on this beautiful truck is that IF the automatic is an overdrive transmission (instead of the likely C4) then that is the weak link in this truck. Also, the 2 8 needs periodic valve adjustments. (Solid lifters) A very well done truck. If I could figure out how to download pictures, I would be happy to show some of the ones that I have done.
Fords biggest issue with the 4 banger gasser was low power and POOR mileage in the pickups. Automatics were the worst, my sons 5 speed we bought him couldn’t push itself down the highway in 5th. It was a low mileage shortbed. The diesels were much better and the v-6 were ok.
I would like to know what you call poor mileage. I typically get 20-24 MPG and I never slow down. (average speed is 75-85 mph) Even when loaded and in town I have never gotten less than 19mpg. For a Honda Civic, that is bad mileage. For any kind of brick at 4,500 feet elevation that’s very reasonable. Maybe with an air dam and a sloping cover from cab to tailgate, I could get 25-28 mpg. But with a lumber rack and cargo normally exceeding the cab height. I’m pleased with that.
You probably had one of the v-6 options. My son’s was 19 on the highway at best, like i said with a 5 speed. I drove several that the was the best they could do. We also had a pinto 2 liter auto that could only get 19mpg. While a friend had a 4 speed stick that could get about 30.
Friends with Toyota pickups were all getting around 28 on the highway. When you compared small trucks to small trucks , the ranger stunk. Maybe you were the fortunate one.