FORD RANGERS !! wtf

[CustomWhips]

ive been in two races with a ranger. onece i had no mods nothing totaly stock. i lost badly.

just tonight. i pull up to a red light in back of a ford ranger so as soon as it hits green i gas it hard and slam left to get in the opposite lane i get beside him and he nails it. and fucking just loses me. again.

man. this sucks.

[Neutrino]

I though ford rangers were suposed to be slow. I mean they don't even have v8's only NA v6's.

[TerminalVelocity]

actually some people put 5.0's in them.

But that v6...



4.0L V-6
Horsepower (SAE net @ rpm) 207 @ 5250
Torque (lb.-ft. @ rpm) 238 @ 3000

Rear Axle Ratio 3.55/4.10 (one hell of a hard launch)


Also, even the bigger rangers are light as hell, unfortnually ford in all its genus dosent give weight on it...

But with those power specs, your not going to win with simple mods, you need some real umph to ditch one of those.

[YogsVR4]

If you have a stock civic, you should realize that you have a slow enocomy car and I'd venture to say most cars on the road of higher value (purchase price) are going to be faster.

[THE4TH]

can't argue with reality..
stock civics aren't fast..
now i grant you .. i would think i could smoke a ranger.. or at least take it.. but hey..

[carrrnuttt]

What kinda Rangers did you race? (i.e.: Ranger Splash, Splash Supercab, XLT, etc, etc...)

According to car-stats.com, the Ford Ranger does the quarter ranging from 16.6 to 17.3 depending on the trims (all V6...no stats on the four).

You must have an LX. Car-stats shows that Civic DX's 1996 and up are rated at 16.7 stock, and EX's of the same generation are at 16.6, while the LX is rated at 17.2...with the four-door versions of each model being a bit quicker...'cause they're lighter (I weighed mine at the State Landfill at 2340LBS). The base DX is almost as fast as the VTEC equipped EX because of the weight advantage.

Oh and even if you have a DX or EX, the Ranger being a RWD would've gotten the jump on you, and with the speed similarities, you would just hang, but not get ahead.

[94svt5.0]

But magazine facts dont always tell the story. Mistakes occur sometimes too.

[CustomWhips]

now that i think about it ive raced 3. one i kept up with but it was not complete stops it was 2nd through 3rd gear races. so in the long run id prolly get em. but when i race from a stop light they leave me.
and yeah all i got are simple mods. shit the ranger got 205hp civics got what 115 ima say 120 - 125 with mods. but my cars lighter then a ranger aye. dont know. them god damn rangers. i dont know what it was. xlt ect... but v6 vs 4 cylinder ? no match realy. higher red line o well. rangers got more power i got that.

[a23dranger]

Hey man those 4.0's in the 01-up rangers are quick. 207 horse. put a little bit of money into them they get real quick. the older 00-below 4.0s are only 160 horse i believe. i mean they make superchargers for them- www.explorerexpress.com is one. bbk used to make one and vortech used to also. they can get up there in the numbers. Also you have to watch out for us 2.3l 4cyl ranger guys. we swap 2.3l ford thunderbird turbo coupe, and 2.3l turbo svo stang motors in to our trucks then run lots of boost and whop on unsuspecting people when we want to or swap 5.0 v8's in them as well. Later

[Mad_Maxima]

Where's Red when u need him?? I didn't bring up a 3 and a half year old thread when i was a noob, do ppl actually go out looking for old ass threads to revive, i jus don't get how u would find something this old unless you purposely went looking for it.

Close this shyt.

[a23dranger]

yo i'm sorry. i was searching google for honestly turbo'd rangers and 2.3 parts and this came up and i never looked at the date. my bad guys. later

[_omen]

HA...I didn't even notice the post dates until Maxima brought it up

Yeah...this thread is old...closer er down

[-The Stig-]

Holy fuck.


Die thread die!!... Back to bottomless pit of AF!!!