94 Ranger 4cyl 5 speed towing

[bucket of rivets]

I've owned a 1994 Ranger 4 cylinder with a 5 speed manual since new, it came with a 2" receiver hitch, and every added payload option I could add to it. It's also a long bed, 2 wheel drive model.

Does anyone know what the actual rated towing capacity is?
Its sprung heavier than some full size trucks but has a 2.73:1 rear ratio and a 7.5" rear end.

I've towed as much as 5,000 lbs on flat road but it struggles to launch even a row boat with the steep gear ratio.
The hitch is factory, it came off the carrier with it installed. I've had 1600lbs in the bed and it barely lowers the suspension, so it handles tongue weight well too.

My rear brakes are also over sized, when I replaced the rear shoes none of the listings matched, the shoes were wider and larger in diameter by a half inch.

I've been told that 4cylinder stick Rangers aren't recommended for towing but this one came with a rather beefy hitch and full factory trailer wiring.

I've been considering hunting down a larger rear axle for this, something from a V6 truck with a lower gear ratio.
My concerns are the rear wheel bearings and ring gear when it comes to long distance towing. I'm planning a trip to FL and I'll be hauling one of my boats over 2300 miles round trip, maybe more.

Trailer brakes would be nice but I don't think they exist for trailers with 8" wheels or do I like the feel of surge brakes behind a light vehicle.

 

[Bob_VT]

Re: 94 Ranger 4cyl 5 speed towing

It is rated at 1500 lbs. Not really a vehicle to be towing with at the number's you posted.

 

[bonz_d]

Re: 94 Ranger 4cyl 5 speed towing

Can't say I am sure just what your question is but I will relate this. Recently traded my 98 Ranger 4cyl. automatic. It was a bear to tow with. Pulling a 10' Coleman popup trailer it would get pushed while trying to stop going down hill. Pulling a 14' Lund it would slip and spin the tires on most ramps. Had a Ford Escape that pulled better than that Ranger.

I now have a GMC Canyon with a 5 cyl. that pulls those like they are not even there.

 

[Silvertip]

Re: 94 Ranger 4cyl 5 speed towing

I once owned a Ranger equipped as you described and it was the most helpless vehicle I've ever owned. My boat at the time was a very light 14 foot row boat with a 10 HP Johnson. Well under 1500 GVW. Five speed transmission and low numerical axle ratios (high gears) generally make terrible tow vehicles.

 

[starcraftkid]

Re: 94 Ranger 4cyl 5 speed towing

I've got the same truck, that motor is only about 100hp, but a gear change can really perk it up. I've been looking for a 4.10:1 8.8" rear end for mine but no luck so far, at least not in my price bracket.
My last one came the same way, I swapped the rear for one with a 3.73 Ratio and it made for a whole different vehicle. Fuel mileage went up and not down too, I suppose because the motor didn't have to work as hard to keep the truck moving.
The two weak links in that truck are the clutch hydraulics and the 7.5" rear axle. Neither are very heavy duty. I've replaced a half dozen clutch slave cylinders and 4 master cylinders and had one 7.5" rear end self destruct, luckily that was while it was still under warranty.
Wheel spin on the ramp can be fixed by adding some weight in the bed. The big concern is the gear ratio and getting it moving up a ramp without frying the clutch. The motor just don't make the power to pull much more than itself up the ramp, so stalling is a big issue.
I've since bought an older 300ci F150 just for launching the boat, it too is a stick shift but with 3.23 gears, but it pulls like freight train on the ramp and is almost impossible to stall. It just don't get the 20mpg that the Ranger gets, nor does it have the ice cold AC my Ranger has.

 

[bonz_d]

Re: 94 Ranger 4cyl 5 speed towing

I used to love my Ranger until I drove a Canyon. The Canyon out performs the Ranger in every way accept seating comfort. Pulls better, rides better, larger cab and it even gets better fuel milage.

 

[JB]

Re: 94 Ranger 4cyl 5 speed towing

I had a 4 cylinder 5 speed RWD Ranger back in the early 90s. It could barely tow a 1,000# rig and had a scary way of trying to stop even that.

Not a tow vehicle.

 

[Silvertip]

Re: 94 Ranger 4cyl 5 speed towing

I've got the same truck, that motor is only about 100hp, but a gear change can really perk it up. I've been looking for a 4.10:1 8.8" rear end for mine but no luck so far, at least not in my price bracket.
My last one came the same way, I swapped the rear for one with a 3.73 Ratio and it made for a whole different vehicle. Fuel mileage went up and not down too, I suppose because the motor didn't have to work as hard to keep the truck moving.
The two weak links in that truck are the clutch hydraulics and the 7.5" rear axle. Neither are very heavy duty. I've replaced a half dozen clutch slave cylinders and 4 master cylinders and had one 7.5" rear end self destruct, luckily that was while it was still under warranty.
Wheel spin on the ramp can be fixed by adding some weight in the bed. The big concern is the gear ratio and getting it moving up a ramp without frying the clutch. The motor just don't make the power to pull much more than itself up the ramp, so stalling is a big issue.
I've since bought an older 300ci F150 just for launching the boat, it too is a stick shift but with 3.23 gears, but it pulls like freight train on the ramp and is almost impossible to stall. It just don't get the 20mpg that the Ranger gets, nor does it have the ice cold AC my Ranger has.

Unless you recalibrated the speedometer (speedo drive gear) your mileage did not increase like you think it did. The speedo registered more miles because the increased revs made the speedo register more miles than you actually traveled.

 

[starcraftkid]

Re: 94 Ranger 4cyl 5 speed towing

Unless you recalibrated the speedometer (speedo drive gear) your mileage did not increase like you think it did. The speedo registered more miles because the increased revs made the speedo register more miles than you actually traveled.

On mine I just went to the dealer and asked for the speedo gear to match the ratio and trans combo I had. The speedo should have been pretty close. Not only that, the amount of gas I used just going to work decreased, with the tall gears, a full tank got me to and from work 6 times, after I swapped the rear I could go back and forth to work 9 times on the same tank of gas. The increase in mileage was pretty noticeable. I just figured that the motor wasn't working as hard. With the 2.73 gears I couldn't use 5th gear unless I was going over 60 mph or it would lose speed, with the new rear I could shift into and run 5th gear over 45 mph or so. The swap actually made the truck fun to drive. In my opinion, it could have used an even lower gear, a 4.11 or lower would have been even more suited for my type of driving.

I also used to drive an automatic 2.3L Ranger at work, that truck was way faster than any of mine with stick shift. Although it kept puking transmissions, when it was running it was a quick little truck. It never towed anything though. I think it had a 3.73 rear end but the engine made far more power or the trans just kept the motor in the right RPM range for best acceleration. It never got great mileage though, maybe 22 mpg tops on the highway and about 15 around town. From day one that truck was fun to drive, unlike a stock 5 speed manual truck, it had no trouble spinning the wheels or taking off. It was a short lived vehicle around the shop because it got used the most by many drivers, it was traded in after only three years with a quarter of a million miles on the clock when the trans acted up for the last time.

 

[crossroads123]

Re: 94 Ranger 4cyl 5 speed towing

I too have a 98 Ranger 4cl 5 speed with which I tow my 16 foot Alumacraft with a 40hp Mercury. I have to be extremely careful when pulling off a ramp. I have recently notiiced the throwout bearing squealing.

 

[halfmoa]

Re: 94 Ranger 4cyl 5 speed towing

I've replaced a half dozen clutch slave cylinders and 4 master cylinders and had one 7.5" rear end self destruct, luckily that was while it was still under warranty.

What on earth are you doing with your vehicle that you had 6 slave cylinders, 4 master cylinders and a rear end go out within the warranty period?


Also in re the OP's post, my friend had a 4 cyl 5 speed Ranger that barely towed a 12 foot tinny. Four wheel drive pulled it up the ramp fine but it really wasn't a tow vehicle.

 

[starcraftkid]

Re: 94 Ranger 4cyl 5 speed towing

What on earth are you doing with your vehicle that you had 6 slave cylinders, 4 master cylinders and a rear end go out within the warranty period?


Also in re the OP's post, my friend had a 4 cyl 5 speed Ranger that barely towed a 12 foot tinny. Four wheel drive pulled it up the ramp fine but it really wasn't a tow vehicle.

No clue as to what gives with the master and slave cylinders, but they're made of plastic. My master cylinder just started leaking again today, this one has been installed for maybe 5 years but only about 2500 miles. The truck sits a lot, it's not my main ride these days and is only used for hauling the boat which weighs less than 1000 lbs in tow. (16' tinny with a 25hp motor and 8" wheel trailer).
If your buddy has a 4x4 model with the 2.3L 4 banger, it should have 4.11:1 gears. Mine came with 2.73:1 gears. Even with the 3.73 rear end it needs lower gears.
I keep looking for a 4.0L Ranger that can donate a 4.11 8.8" rear end.

Rangers were notorious for week clutches, the internal slave cylinder design is crap, it requires pulling the trans to change the slave cylinder. At least mine isn't a 4x4 when it comes to changing the slave cylinder but it still kills half a day to pull the trans and change. The master cylinder isn't much fun to change either, when your 6'3" tall/350lbs getting under that dash isn't much fun.
I've always said it would be a far better truck if they came up with a real transmission option, both the auto and stick transmissions were under rated and problematic if the truck was used for anything but a grocery getter.
I think the older Rangers were tougher, my 1985 2.3L long bed 4x2 Ranger was far more durable with it's 4 speed trans, but even that ate up two rear ends in only 240,000 miles. The motor outlasted the trans and rear.
I've always wished that the aftermarket would come up with a heavier transmission solution or adapter for the Ranger.