I’m beginning to feel less like some dude trawling the junkyards and more like Cal Worthington hawking miles and miles of slightly used cars what with all of the barely used creampuffs that I find in the ‘yards. Once again I can present to you yet another unwanted vehicle at the junkyard that looks like it could fire right up and drive out under its own power and then keep going for at least another 100,000 miles. Only this time, it’s a pickup truck and from what I recall, it’s exactly what everybody keeps on saying they want in a truck. Small (not mid-size!), economical, regular cab, with a longer bed to carry more mulch, and a low price. And a minimum of fancy stuff; no screens, no airbags, no safety stuff, let’s all just be thrown clear into a haystack like in the old days. Guess what? That’s never being offered again as a new truck. Not even the upcoming Ford Maverick that will start at $21,490 (including the non-optional destination charge) qualifies as it has a rear seat and a very short bed instead. And probably some safety gear and I know I saw a touchscreen in the preview I saw. And it’s FWD and unibody, so it’ll never last, you don’t want any part of that, right? Right.
But this! This seems to be exactly it! Where were you when the heirs or whoever put it on the curb or on Craigslist or FB Marketplace or whatever? You missed out. Big time. Any offer would have likely taken it, they probably got $200 when they hauled it down here as scrap while every other used vehicle seems to be currently fetching 3x what it was worth a year ago.
1983 was the first year of the Ranger. Well, the Ranger as its own truck model, there were other Ranger variants of the F-series before. This one though took over from the Courier and was hurriedly moved up in the sales schedule when GM came out with the S-10 and cleaned up for about six months without this as competition. As a result, the 1983 model year was a long one, about a year and a half. This one was built in the latter part of the production year but is still a first-year model.
This one’s got the regular cab and it’s got the long bed at 7 feet. Did you know that still makes it a whole foot shorter than the Maverick? Perhaps the rear bumper wasn’t included in that though as I’m fairly sure it was an accessory back then. Still. What on this truck can’t be fixed for pennies when (if) it breaks?
Chrome front bumper. Eggcrate grille (for those large AA grade eggs as opposed to Chevy’s smaller ones). The Ford logo up front and no-nonsense large sealed beams to dimly light the way home.
It’s an XL model, so around the middle of the range back then. There was a Ranger with no suffix below it as well as a fancier XLS and then the top XLT above. No Platimum, Limited, or King Ranch nonsense. Or even Prince Ranch back then, fancy trucks didn’t really sell. But they were still handy and loads of folks bought them. Although a Ranger eXtraLarge is a bit of an oxymoron when you think about it.
Ford was all about the tape stripe back in those days. And to good effect, I’ll add. I miss the old two-tones now that they are gone (and I’m not validating the bit of contrast paint you can get on the rocker panel area these days as an option on many trucks, that doesn’t count). The painted FORD is good too, now you can pay extra for a colored insert into the embossed areas of the tailgate if your choice offers that.
Seven feet of Lebensraum back here, six was standard. I could have stretched out like nobody’s business on the overland trip in this thing and still had the tailgate up. You could even reach over the bed sides and scoop those leaves out by hand! The bed itself looks in excellent shape, I’m thinking this truck was likely even garaged its whole life.
I’ll confess to seeing a few tiny specks of rust on the right side of the bed above the wheel well. But those dents I’m guessing were put in here at the yard. The owner must have fretted about the rust though. Still, at this rate there’s lots of life left in it even as is.
According to the VIN that’s the 2.3l Lima engine, although the 2.0l version was also available. 80hp sounds frightful enough, but the 73hp of the 2.0, well, maybe the Maverick is sounding better in that regard. But I’m thinking it runs fine, nobody has even touched this engine in a long time. The air cleaner lid is still there and dusty without fingerprints, that’s always the first thing to be opened up.
That’s not even dirt, it’s just dust from driving and perhaps sitting. Nothing’s missing besides a battery. I believe I was the first person to open this hood after the truck was placed in its spot.
Showroom fresh. And no safety nannies like headrests, your head can take a hit against the back glass, it’s not like the rear bumper is going to absorb anything! It does have seatbelts but the jury is out if they were ever worn. Nice beige-ish fabric upholstery with vinyl borders. Wood-grain trim on the dash. Carpets. Such hedonism.
I made an exception this time and actually got in, I was curious how I would fit and frankly the truck was basically cleaner than the vehicle I arrived in. It turns out that with the seat all the way back (a little further than it was in this picture), a person that is 6’1″ with a 32″ inseam fits perfectly with no slop. Now, the steering wheel doesn’t adjust and neither do the pedals so it’s a little rigid and all, but it did work for me, if you match or are smaller you’d be fine. Plenty of headroom too.
A full complement of gauges bar a tachometer. Warning lights in the middle. A knob for the headlights on the lower left and the wipers on a separate stalk from the turn signal stalk (which is slightly below and out of frame).
46,917 miles. And I think they are the total, no missing first digit. The seat is in too good of a condition for that, the vinyl shows no wear and the fabric wasn’t even remotely loose or different from driver to passenger side.
It’s got the optional five-speed. Like a Toyota SR5! The knob looks practically new as well.
No headliner in an XL, just painted metal in perfect condition. Not even any oxidation rust. The visors had little mirrors clipped to the other side and the dome light looks like new as well. And there’s even a coathook!
The cubby up on the dash is handy to store stuff that doesn’t need to be in the glovebox below. That’s a cigarette lighter to the right of the steering column, it matches the headlight knob on the other side. No A/C on this one, but who needs that. It has a radio with two knobs, no presets, and a slot for the 8-track! You did keep all of your tapes, right?
I’m not sure what I could possibly say here. It’s virtually perfect. That little dark area should clean right up.
I did though find all of the vehicle documentation except for the Monroney. Even the paint chips! Desert Tan and Light Desert Tan. The truck apparently hailed from Kansas, one state to the east of here.
Built March of 1983, USA Ford Truck, GVWR 3001-4000lbs, Ranger 4×2, 2.3liter 4-cylinder, 1983 model, assembled in Louisville, Kentucky.
The base price for a 1983 Ranger was around $6,400, but since this is the XL with a long bed, the larger 4-cylinder, two tone paint, and the five-speed, it’d be more. Motorweek actually tested a very similar truck in the same two-tone color scheme, also an XL with this longer bed but the smaller 2.0l and 4-speed and said theirs cost $8,200. So let’s add a few hundred for the larger engine and 5-speed and call it $8,500 for this one. Which is about $23,000 today. Assuming this truck actually did run and the bed didn’t have the side dent before it was dropped off here, how much would you have paid for it last week?
Last week, if it happened to wander within striking distance?
Probably 5-600, just because, then try to figure out what to do with it.
This one brings back memories, as it is close to my ’88 XLT. It was an air conditioned V-6, same body and color, including fake wood dash. XLT just added a tach, velour seat, cloth headliner and wheel trim rings.
How much would be needed to add power brakes….and steering, so as to make it a little more livable with?
About half an hour of yard work per day. 🙂
Not really needed in these since they are so light and have such skinny tires.
Best friend got one of these (new) as his first vehicle. We were both about 6 2″ – that little cab was tight for us, and absolutely no room for a third person. These types of trucks appeal to old men who are cheap, handy, and often alone. For the average new vehicle buyer, more versatility is needed. I cant wait for the maverick – very interested myself in a 30mpg trucklet that can also carry a few people, take garbage to the dump, kayaks to the lake.
What a shame. Looks a lot cleaner than my 93 Sport. The new Maverick can go hang.
Look, pic #9, manual steering.
Apparently the option was getting so scarce that the shield for the rag-joint is PS specific. Then, for non-PS a “dummy” piece was built to mimick the PS hose, so that the shield would have its usual place by which it’s retained.
Summer of ’85, worked in an oil field in central Alberta. As one of the summer student employees I was always borrowing other operators’ trucks, and the Ranger was my fave. Had the 5 spd like this, but with the Cologne V6. Boy that was a fun truck – light, powerful and “tossable,” but enough ground clearance to get through the mud. The S-10s, OTOH, were so low they were always getting stuck.
This is the most intact curbside recycling that I’ve seen you share here. I think Ford did a good job of making the first-gen Ranger look like a junior-size F-series. This would make a handy little hauler, albeit a bit “exciting” on the freeway.
Have no idea what you mean about “exciting” on the freeway means, the most exciting part about my Ranger is opening up the Holley 4 barrel on the freeway and enjoying watching this 4WD truck with the aerodynamics of a concrete block go from 60 to 90 without the C4 even downshifting. But you can’t do it on wet pavement.
“Exciting” in the way Calvin and Hobbes’s sled and wagon rides were exciting.
Very much so ~ my 2001 Ranger has fairly twitchy steering, this is nice when I’m in town and dodging traffic and working in and out of narrow alleys etc. but on the freeway at 70 + MPH I have to pay full attention else I’m sure it’ll kill me .
I keep reading how folks say “I wish they still made trucklets like this” but I wonder if they’re the commercial version of the brown Diesel station wagon….
-Nate
Maybe so, but if you can’t buy it (anymore) what difference does it make?
I fit the description “These types of trucks appeal to old men who are cheap, handy, and often alone.” that Steve P Mahler mentioned in his post. My problem is that the selection of vehicles seems to be narrowing, instead of widening….I’ve never owned a small pickup, though it would fit my habits, for 3 reasons:
– I don’t often haul loads. A truck is handy for that, but gives it up in passenger carrying.
-I’m on the large size so though I fit in a subcompact car, these seem like they’d be a bit tight, maybe not as space efficient as a unibody car.
-I like my passenger car ride…sometimes I travel on the highway, and don’t want a punishing ride or noise from the road.
My cousin (very similar to me…single, handy, cheap, etc.) in fact has a Ford Ranger, but also has a “regular” car.
I only own one car at a time; my preferred car has been a hatchback, probably would still be but they seem to be disappearing, they seem to be pushing me to buy a crossover, or even an SUV. I don’t mind (in fact prefer) the slightly higher ride height over a hatchback, but don’t need AWD and would prefer to forego the added complexity, and I don’t like the space inefficiency that comes with FWD with AWD as an option in the same vehicle (maybe partly due to wanting a vehicle built for me instead of a “universal” model). It’s probably what I’ll end up with but not without reservations on my part…I like the better fuel economy a car gives, just would like a bit higher ingress/egress height. Probably a full sized wagon would be about right (aside from the fuel economy, but remember engines have improved in that respect since those cars were offered decades ago).
I did buy my last car new, but confess that my prior cars were bought used. I know people say car manufacturers are only trying to sell to original buyers, but think that’s a bit of a cop-out…do companies only serve original stock buyers, not the secondary market? Maybe so, but think that’s a bit short sighted, if they are in business for the long run. I’m a customer even if I’m not the original buyer….after all, I free up the original owner of the car to buy another (new?) car, which they might not be able to do until and unless I buy their used car (kind of the same thing goes on in the stock market as well, I think). I’m just a picky buyer, and know what I want, even if the market no longer thinks I’m their target market, to me that’s their choice, but that doesn’t negate my also wanting to have a choice.
Well said ZWEP ;
It’s a fact that manufacturers don’t much care what happens after the initial buyer ~ look at Ford who discontinued suspension parts (& more) for their wildly popular Panthers less than 10 years in .
It shows in the engineering as well ~ any modern vehicle should easily rack up serious miles but most have weak points and will fall apart quickly after ten years or so, more’s the pity .
-Nate
Without getting into the usual cries of “What a shame”, yada yada yada, I’d think this would be worth a couple thousand dollars to someone with the right use case. I grew up on ten non-farm acres in a fairly rural area, and we always had a truck parked behind the garage for specific uses like hauling brush, junk, picking up landscaping or home repair products etc. These trucks rarely travelled more than 5 miles from home, so they didn’t have to have a whole lot to them as long as they did the job. Someone in that situation could easily pay $2500 for a homeowner grade lawn tractor and trailer, and that couldn’t be used to go to Lowe’s.
I get the application, makes sense for some, but since it seems like there’s always some turn-key clunker of a truck available for way less than the mentioned two grand, I think it’d be tough to get that much. Probably why it ended up where it is.
Wow, somebody must have not cared for neither the vehicle or trying to get actual money for it. That’s in fantastic shape for 1983.
And the 2.3, what a powerhouse compared to the 2.0 my Ranger had. You can read my review of that engine here:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-american/coal-1988-ford-ranger-the-wee-truck/
My bet is it was owned by an older person who passed away. No one in the estate wanted it and they just junked it. Sadly, that scenario is quite common.
I suspect serious transmission or driveline failure here. The yard is savvy enough to put something like this out front with a price tag on it. Either expensive mechanical failure or unsolvable title issues are at work on this one. I’m sure it will be stripped like the carcass of a Thanksgiving turkey very quickly.
Wow, what a waste .
Even if the crispy cam belt snapped of old age it’s still a decent truck, ready to be pressed into run it into the ground gerdeners rig or some cheap, tight assed old man like me to grab it for $500 wax it up and dump another $1,500 into new shocks, U-Joints and tires….
I bet grandpa died and this was tossed out with his Veteran stuff .
American is so wasteful .
-Nate
I’m lucky this is a long distance away, ’cause I’d be tempted if there was nothing catastrophically wrong. The Ranger would be useful, and fun to shine up a bit, but I wouldn’t feel guilty about leaving it out in the weather rather than finding a garage for it. (Plus, I’d no longer have to treat my Escape as a part-time truck!)
“no-nonsense large sealed beams to dimly light the way home.”
The advantage of a standard sealed-beam headlight is you can get high quality, fully legal LED replacement lights.
Let’s see how well a pair of ten-year-newer clouded plastic lenses light the way home?
I’ve got the same size halogen sealed beams on the Chevy truck and don’t know what is the issue. Who drives empty roads at high speed at night? Not me and very few others. The low beam pattern is more useful than my Honda Fit with clear plastic lenses, which need constant polishing, and halogen capsules.
If your Honda Fit’s headlamps need constant polishing, they are long past due for replacement with new lamps, and no amount of polishing or other work will bring them back near new-lamp output.
RE : cloudy plastic headlamps :
They suck even after you polish them with great care .
I researched and found two N.O.S. O.E.M. Ranger headlights (in two different states) and Lo ! .
The road is clearly lit once again .
Plenty of $50 pairs of Chinese plastic headlights out there, mostly they go opaque in three years .
7″ round seal beams are still made in America and if you se the 6014 or 6016 versions they’ll light your way better than the original 6012’s did .
Halogen etc. is nice but better if you add a headlight relay .
Judging by the amount of single vehicle rollover collisions in So. Cal. after sunset I think plenty are still driving fast in the dark .
-Nate
Plastic headlamp lenses are a curse, and headlamp relays are a good idea, but most of the rest of this what you say is very much not so and/or multiple decades out of date.
Well yeah Daniel ;
I drive vintage vehicles daily…..
So I have better hands on with those old 7″ seal beams than most .
I tried the 7″ halogen replacements and they draw significantly more current than do the 7″ seal beams .
As long as they’re properly adjusted seal beams are O.K. ~ not as good as the European glass fronted headlights in my Euro spec. Mercedes but when I get a glass chip in a seal beam it’s no big deal and cheap to fix .
-Nate
Oof. No, I don’t mean your cars are out of date, I mean your headlamp advice is out of date. This really isn’t the best place to be talking about this, and I don’t mean to denigrate you, but…you’re not batting very high here.
There are no longer any sealed beams on the market that are even remotely worth using—none of them you can presently buy gives even minimally adequate safety performance—and the 7″ halogen replacements category includes a mountain of junk and a few very good lamps. Also, European-spec headlamps are not necessarily better than US-spec lamps.
I buy groceries and pay bills with my expertise in vehicle lighting, but I really, really don’t want to get into it here and now—my fault for picking at the thread; sorry about that. Can we please agree with a smile to have whatever further discussion on this topic in another place at another time?
I dont know about other makes, but these had a hard outer coating that eventually degraded. This had to be sanded off in order to polish the plastic, which now lacks that coating and needs more frequent care. Glass needs none of this nonsense. If a rock damages a glass sealed beam, as little as $15 for the H6054XV I use.
My main point is that the lens reflector combo, at least on this car, does not produce as good a low beam cutoff, for fog and snow, as the lens pattern on the truck. If I want to upgrade, Hella separate bulb conversions are available for about $50.
Isn’t there supposed to be some sort of coating you put on the plastic lenses after polishing ? .
I didn’t know this and really don’t like foggy headlights so I set out to find some new O.E.M. ones, problem solved .
Here in So. Cal. many of these trucks appear to have really big parking lights at night instead of headlights .
I’m still learning, others can’t .
I didn’t claim anywhere that 50 year old lighting is as good as proper new headlights .
-Nate
It is a bit surprising this was not sold a unit rather than parted out. As an old compact
truck owner, these and their brethren are perfect for their intended purpose. Little to
break, cheap to fix, easy to park. Fuel mileage is acceptable if not actually good. An
added, intangible attribute is that they are actually fun to drive in a vintage sports car
kind of way. I would place a (small) bet that this could be driven home with minimal
repairs.
here in So. Cal. very few junkyards still sell vehicles complete .
It’s a real shame because so many classics get scrapped because they’ve been sitting in the old folks garage or backyard .
-Nate
Since I have close family out there I keep a bookmark I check about once a week of Denver Craigslist cars with my usual settings of 1955-1995 $0-$5000, and I can safely say I never saw this Ranger pop up there once in the last few years, so I’d wager whoever junked it didn’t even try to sell it.
This one has a yellow spray-painted “X” on the windshield, that the vehicles around it don’t have. Does anyone versed in junkyard doings and processes know what the “X” might signify?
I think that is going to vary significantly from yard to yard.
Around here they put a day-glo orange X on a car that is nearing its time for the crusher. Obviously not the case in this situation.
At least that truck didn’t meet the same fate as Hank Hill’s truck in an episode of King of the Hill.
That episode blew my mind when I first saw it, up to that point in the show I had thought Hank’s truck was either a new 97 F150 or a newer Ranger.
For the first few seasons Hank’s truck was indeed a 90s Ranger. Then in this one episode it suddenly became a much older Ranger. Clearly the writers of this episode weren’t concerned with continuity. After the Ranger was destroyed in this episode Hank got a new F150.
As others have said this is sad. My guess is also that grandpa died and no one wanted the truck for themselves. Maybe they did try and start it and that ancient timing belt gave up the ghost when it was cranked for the first time in the several years since the owner stopped driving. Don’t know what they cost now but back in the day the belt was ~$10 and it is a quick and easy job.
I’m assuming that in your state they don’t let wrecking yard sell complete cars. I know around here it would have spent a couple of weeks in the “builder” section before they would have stuck out in the general population.
They do, in fact this yard currently has a very rusty ’59 Cadillac out front along with some sort of a municipal maintenance tractor thing as well as a motorcycle. But they used to have more of a real selection of what seemed like at least semi-drivable cars, that kind of went away for the most part last year and hasn’t come back with any vigor, at least at these U-Pull-N-Pay branded yards.
I think they are experiencing a bit of a worker shortage, the other yard owned by the same outfit has been much less organized lately (which is really saying something) as well as me having witnessed the yard workers themselves vandalizing vehicles with customers in the vicinity (breaking windows and stuff), it’s possible that they just stick pretty much everything in the yard except for when someone in charge actually makes an effort, who knows.
I’ve also noticed over the last few months that while there are certainly random creampuffs, the overall quality of the cars has gone downhill a bit as it seems that the “marginal” ones are now worth being fixed and resold with used car prices so high instead of just being brought here. Stuff like decade-old Kia SUVs and other relatively modern things were relatively common around here in the junkyards, not any more, they seem to be getting another lease on life now unless badly accident damaged.
I have to wonder if the change is due to a change in management. Seems to me that if you have a worker shortage putting it in the builder row would require less man hours in the short term as it doesn’t need to have the fluids drained before being sat.
I would also think that with what has happened with used car pricing in recent months would cause them to shift to putting more cars in the builder row as the equation is highly dependent on what it can be sold for if fixed.
I can see more cars falling on the fix rather than scrap side of the equation with the recent boost in used car prices causing a shift in the landscape of wrecking yards. Can’t say I’ve been to one since the beginning of the pandemic.
It requires some thought and takes work away from the “mechanics” that do the draining and yard prepping, so perhaps. There’s likely a management shortage as well or perhaps a lack of an attractive corporate incentivization plan based on profits and/or a training deficiency, who knows. There are on the surface multiple ways to increase the dollars being brought in at most of these yards, but I suppose if at the end of the day the main money is in the scrappage end of it, then that’s the core competency, everything else is gravy.
“Can’t say I’ve been to one since the beginning of the pandemic.”
I was pleasantly surprised at these in that regard, I was apprehensive at first. They all took masking very seriously, wouldn’t let you in the building without one, and once out in the yard all the customers gave each other an even wider berth than usual with the majority masked up (which was easier in the winter months, admittedly). All told FAR better than any single grocery store around here in all respects.
I take that back I did go to a yard once late last summer, to get a window for my buddy’s wheel chair van. Definitely much easier to do social distancing than in the local grocery store, Costco or Home Depot. Of course at the wrecking yard everyone is going to their own respective isle vs everyone crowding the toilet paper/meat/lumber isles.
Around here the big chain in Pick-N-Pull which is owned by Schnitzer Steel. They bought the yards to have a reliable supply for their shredder at the port of Tacoma. So yeah as long as the yard pays for itself anything else it generates is gravy.
Still you would think they would have some incentive to maximize a given store’s income.
When you and I are finally put in charge of everything things will change!
We have this particular company (two locations with a third down in the Springs), then there are a couple of LKQ yards which seem to have the least pleasant workers in the world, especially at the office so I generally just avoid those, and then there are still several good size independents that seem to be doing quite well and if anything are better at the whole thing than the big guys, they probably pay better and seem to have less staff turnover.
All of them though line up the cars in rows (and sections, i.e. all American, all SUV/Pickup, all imports, and some even or just delineate by Ford, GM, Chrysler, Imports and they stay until all the rows in the section are full and then the first row is removed and crushed until it fills up again with new inventory and then on to the next row and so forth. Every once in a while a particular car is given a reprieve and “reset” to give it another couple of months, usually if it still has lots of meat on the bone or someone thinks it has some greater sort of intrinsic value than the others (which I know you know but not everyone here has been to a pick/n/pull.)
There is one independent, that is smaller like 18-20 rows total that just sits the cars in the order they come in with no concern given to the mfg.
PNP is interesting in that the ones around here have a full size truck/van area. I think it may be due to how quickly those get picked over and are ready to crush. They are often the rows close to the processing area.
Meanwhile the less than full size trucks and vans get mixed in with the cars/SUVs from that mfg. So an Econoline or Ram would be in the truck section but a Ranger or Caravan will be in the Ford or Chrysler section.
I had a 94 Ranger, bought when it was a year old with 12,000 miles on it, I don’t remember what I paid for it. Mine was a 4 cylinder, 5 speed, with A/C, power steering and brakes, and AM/FM cassette painted in a sort of taupe color.
Mine made it to 80,000 miles before my abusive driving ” killed ” the clutch. It was an $800-$900 repair, something that could POSSIBLY have killed this truck. After all, who spends that kind of money on a truck that borders on being a stripper?
If I lived somewhere besides Florida, this would be an attractive proposition, the manual steering wouldn’t turn me off.
BTW, this week I passed by a string of used car lots in northern Florida where the inventory rarely changes. I say this because sometimes there isn’t a market for any decent vehicle you run across.
Oh my, what a nice little truck. I never really liked that Ford Lima 4 due to its rough nature, but it was durable. Maybe it takes those of us in rust country to really appreciate something like this enough to spend money.
There’s one of these routinely buzzing about the neighborhood, used by some young guy as a daily. Same color too. Runs well, no smoke, no exhaust smell. I like seeing it around.
The contingent who has been demanding this type of truck be manufactured once again is vocal, but I’m unsure exactly how abundant they are. Apparently not very, as car companies have a pretty good bead on the market and as well all know nothing like this has rolled off an assembly line in some time. I too once owned a basic 2WD short cab compact pickup and have no interest in doing so as a daily driver ever again. The upcoming Maverick, however, would work very well in rectifying the complaints I had about that pickup (manual transmission aside) without imposing many compromises.
Before I had a kid, I loved my old Rangers that I owned (two different trucks bought two different summers one after the other). Both had the crude but durable twin I beam front end. Both had lower miles, though the ’97 with 127k felt much more worn out than the old-farmer special ’94 with 106k. XLTs with the 5spd+Lima, regular cabs, air conditioning and power steering, RWD. After a few weeks of driving even highway commuting in them doesn’t phase you. Hard to justify keeping one around now, the old Suburban handles towing/hauling duties and is new/safe enough to serve as a family vehicle (even for long road trips in comfort) as well when called upon.
I have found a number of similar situations involving manual trans vehicles; the elder person owning it goes into a retirement home. Younger generation wander into garage to clean house to pay for the care. Upon learning it has a stick and clutch and is in a shade of taupe only older folks seem to gravitate to, they call the recycling yard not even glancing at the low mileage and well kept condition.
Liquidating assets during a critical health situation often times has little sentiment involved. Once towed to the yard they are told either: (a. no title ? then you must pay us to take it. (b. we will take it off your hands. or (c. this is too old, no one is in need of these parts, so $15.00 is all we will give you. Faced with those decisions on a non running truck, Grandpa’s vehicle has now become another obstacle to overcome. Along with moving his stuff to the thrift store and putting the house up for sale
I bought a Granada 3 speed floor shift, an LTD auto., two Mavericks with column and floor shift 3 speeds, and a Mercury Marquis automatic from local ads under similar circumstance. The selling parties all informed me they were going to the salvage yard by week’s end if not sold privately. All were under 80,000 mile rigs I drove home and resold later after detailing and new fluid changes.
In the end there was nothing wrong with them; they had simply become ‘unwanted’ and unloved to the individual tasked with making a decision
“In the end there was nothing wrong with them; they had simply become ‘unwanted’ and unloved to the individual tasked with making a decision”
So true…
Just sell the now old nag to the glue factory.
and the wipers on a separate stalk from the turn signal stalk (which is slightly below and out of frame).
And that turn signal stalk includes the horn button, avoiding the massive expense of a steering wheel slip ring (cable reel on current cars).
Although I suspect Ford’s true motivation was avoiding warranty claims related to bad steering wheel hub contacts. At the end of the day, customer complaints drove them back to a standard horn button
I’m pretty sure that my ‘86 Ranger had the steering wheel hub horn button. My ‘78 Fiesta had the fingertip horn.
Everything depends on customer demand. Not even demand, just reaching that one person that wants that particular vehicle. Manual transmissions are unwanted by almost all used car buyers, many young people have never learned to drive one, and unless they are looking for a small sporty car, most don’t have any interest in learning. It’s a real hassle to sell a car on your own, sometimes even hazardous to your health. These cars are either donated or scrapped and eventually end up in the wrecking yard.
Owning a car that is not sale-able, even if it is in decent running shape, sometimes feels quite confining. I have several that fit in that category. I’ve decided that I still want my cars, so the situation isn’t that depressing. But if I needed to free up some space, or cut down on insurance, registration, or repair expenses I might have to take more drastic action.
This post hurts. Have not read all the comments yet, but I will. Many of you may know I have a 83 Ranger, long bed 4WD with a 302 and C4 swapped in. Easiest engine/trans swap ever. This poor truck is here simply because it isn’t four wheel drive. Great trucks, mine has simply been awesome. A baby F-250 with its powertrain swap, Currie 9 inch rear axle and 4 wheel disc brakes. All done in late ’91 early ’92 by me. You won’t see my ’83 Ranger in a wrecking yard anytime soon.
I tend to agree with those who say it may never have been offered for sale. The family probably didn’t want it or even deal with it. You would think they could have sold it to a dealer for whatever they got as scrap.
My son’s 1st ride was very similar to this one. Regular cab long bed. His had power steering, power brakes and A/C. Vinyl buckets and rubber floor mats. Also a 4 cylinder 5 speed. He was really happy with his truck. It had about 120K miles. He doubled that during his ownership. Drove it with a buddy from Michigan to Nevada and back. Never missed a beat and 27mpg. The A/C compressor had to be replaced, but the clutch never needed to be replaced while he had it.
My sons truck was white. Probably a business or delivery truck. I found lots of similarly equipped white Rangers as well. These were not in as good of shape as my son’s as his was from Tennessee. They all had a higher price than most small cars of similar vintage and condition. They all sold very quickly, so we didn’t do a lot of dickering on the asking price. With reasonable care they are great basic trucks. Especially for kids.
Here that would have gone on Trademe asking moonbeams first then facebook marketplace next and would likely be getting driven about by some kid by now with lowering and airbagging sa forward plans then the scrapyard after it was pulled to bits and reassembly failed.
In 1983, I left home for the US Navy. After boot camp and service school, I was able to go home before reporting to my first command. I wanted a compact pickup after an ’83 Nissan truck caught my eye one afternoon in a service school parking lot. My dad advised me to give several OEMs a shake vs. what my heart was set on…the Nissan.
I went to a Ford dealer and sat in a brand new ’83 Ranger. At 6’5″ height, my head not only hit the headliner, but bent my neck slightly. Fail. Additionally, the salesmen on the lot didn’t think I was worth their time.
Tried a Chevy S10. Slightly more headroom but still felt cramped. Interior seemed boxy and dated.
Tried a Toyota pickup. Considerably better room but I thought whole truck kind of ugly.
Went to Nissan dealer at last. Sales guy took me seriously. Truck fit me like a glove. And I felt like high cotton driving that thing 1,300 miles to my next duty station. It was a great truck; had lots of good times in it.
A now departed friend of mine had three Rangers during the last decade of his life. I hated anytime I had to ride in one of them. He was, well, cheap, and only the last one had A/C in it, and my ’88 S10 Blazer was like a luxury car inside compared to the Rangers. The first one was stolen and never seen again, the second one was wrecked in a pretty comical way. He was driving back from Chicago and stopped in Elkhart, IN, to get something to eat. He was sitting in his truck and after he ate, he fell asleep, with the trans in neutral. It rolled down a long long hill, and rolled over into a ditch. He woke up in mid roll. The last one was purple, with A/C and was the most pleasant of the three, by far. His health went to hell and eventually after he died, his sister drove the purple Ranger and I used to see it parked in front of her apartment for a long time, but a couple of years ago, it suddenly was gone, replaced with a Chevy Impala, which she still has.
It sounds like this vehicle may not have gotten the chance for people to step up to it; rather, it was quickly/carelessly disposed of.? Manual trans or not, it does take a certain type of person to want to take in a 37 year old vehicle. I don’t think that type of person would be *too* hard to find, but they may not reside directly within your family or close circle of friends.
Where I’m at in Arizona, I honestly think you could have found a buyer within a week. I actually passed an early Ranger on the freeway a few nights ago, and see one here and there, usually on the move. The lack of A/C sucks down here, but Pinto Power™ and a 5 speed is a decent combination (for durability and economy), and no power steering or brakes isn’t a huge hindrance to me. I drive a full size pickup from this era as my daily, and have no regrets besides its poor fuel economy. Sure, it’s not as safe as a newer version, but it’s a risk I’m willing to take for a more authentic driving experience.
As R&DMan pointed out above, this truck was scrapped because it isn’t four wheel drive. A RWD/2WD light truck is fine in most parts of AZ but not anywhere in CO. Gets stuck too easily.
I took that into the equation. I’m not gonna preach about how we got around with 2wd trucks in wintertime for years, ’cause my aforementioned pickup is 4wd, and yes, I even use it as such in Arizona.
I would think, due to its advancing age, somebody in Colorado mighta wanted the old Ranger as a fair weather companion. And there are still a few diehards out there who will load a 2wd down with weight in the back and choose their routes carefully to get where they’re going. But the condition of this one probably should have earned it a spot in the garage during the salty months, no?
There are quite a few old full size 2wd pickups parked on the streets in my neighborhood, driven probably a couple thousand miles a year by their homeowner owners. All they have to do is pay the insurance and license every year. Considering their little use, it probably doesn’t make sense to keep a small truck like a Ranger for those odd jobs when a full size truck is more versatile. 4WD really isn’t needed.
I am actually hoping that you review the new Maverick when it comes out, Jim.
Your reviews are great! – Real world usage! Instead of skid-pad data and other such nonsense like Nürburgring stats, that while interesting, doesn’t really help much when considering a purchase for use in the real world.
I am nearly 6′ tall with a 32-ish” inseam, so your data is perfect for me! ;o)
My wife is absolutely smitten with this little truck, and it isn’t even out yet. She really misses her S-10, and this would be perfect for what little we would need to haul as homeowners.
I still have my 23-year-old Nissan Frontier regular cab, 4-cylinder, 5-speed manual, and RWD. It has a few more creature comforts compared to this Ranger – a/c, power steering, power brakes, and an AM/FM stereo cassette. Locks and windows are manual, and the bed is 6.5 feet long. It works quite well as a 2nd or 3rd vehicle, and I used to commute in it (daily for a time). I’m going to keep it as long as it remains reliable.
Where is this located?? An whats the name of the yard?
I wanna buy this so bad.