|
|
|
|
04-23-2014, 03:02 AM
|
|
OIF Veteran
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 6,044
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boris
nope. Just two people with different experiences. The information presented is to give the OP facts. A 4x 3.0 obviously drinks more gas than a 2x 3.0. We both have extended cab XLT, mine has 3.73 gearing. I get the same mileage he does with E85 while hauling as he does on regular gas (I assume) on the highway. We are just providing information through experience on differently set up Rangers. So that leaves you. Are you butt hurt?
|
Me butthurt? Nope, not in the least. These threads are funny, spend some time in the forum and you'll see this topic is absolutely beaten to death and it always comes down to everyone defending the engine they have in their trucks.
__________________
2001 Ranger 4x4 Stepside
-RCD Suspension lift
-33x12.5 BFG KM2's on Mickey Thomson classic locks
-4:56 gears
-Auburn gear LS
-James Duff traction bars
-Headers
-Flowmaster duals
-SCT X-Cal2 and some small exterior mods
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2321189
2005 F-150 Lariat 4x4
- LED third brake light
-Weathertech floor liners
-Edge tuner
|
|
|
|
Register and never see these ads again. |
|
04-23-2014, 03:18 AM
|
|
Old man driver.
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 14,894
|
|
Re: Pros and Cons of the 3.0 vs. 4.0
"Nothing good has ever come from owning a 3.0"
__________________
2001 Ranger Edge 4x4 (sold)
2006 F150 Lariat 4x4 (sold)
2007 Explorer XLT (Destroyed by Deer on highway)
2014 Explorer XLT (inherited from parents)
|
|
|
|
04-23-2014, 04:53 AM
|
Pooping, on you
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 264
|
|
Re: Pros and Cons of the 3.0 vs. 4.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by 01_ranger_4x4
Me butthurt? Nope, not in the least. These threads are funny, spend some time in the forum and you'll see this topic is absolutely beaten to death and it always comes down to everyone defending the engine they have in their trucks.
|
I know, but I couldn't let a good one liner go unanswered.
The real problem with the Vulcan is it needs to be at 3,000 RPMs and above before any kind of power kicks in. After that it does work. If all anyone does is put their foot into it like they are driving the old 300 I6 or a V8 and expect low rpm power, forget about it. It still blows away any 4 banger ever put in a Ranger. Still a tough engine but no way a Vulcan only has 2.3, 2.5 power, even the DOHC one. Hell, this Vulcan with 140K on the motor has more power than my 88 Caprice classic had with its 5.0 V8.
The Vulcan should be said to suck in 4x4. In a 2x truck it does more work easier eating less gas. There is no way I would get a 4x4 with a vulcan in it. So I agree there lol.
Lets go drink a beer now, well after doing some hauling. I got work to do today.....
|
|
|
|
04-23-2014, 04:58 AM
|
|
Ford Ranger Driver
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,569
|
|
Let's just say if I would've had a choice I would've gone with 4.0. My 3.0 isn't too bad but a 4 would be much better
|
|
|
|
04-23-2014, 05:19 AM
|
|
dumpster fire
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 5,363
|
|
Re: Pros and Cons of the 3.0 vs. 4.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boris
To keep it fair lets hear YOUR experience with the Vulcan you owned, The 4 bangers you owned and your 4.0 you obviousl own. What do you tow, haul and the frequency you tow and haul.
|
like pat said, this topic has been beaten to death over the years. Ive been in the ranger community for 10 years now and you would have to live under a rock to not have a good understanding on what mpg's people typically see.
with that being said, ive owned 4 rangers (1987 2.3 5 speed, 1994 2.3 auto, 2002 4.0 auto and 2003 4.0 5speed), ive also driven a buddys 94 3.0 5 speed all the time (actually bought it and sold it back to him the same weekend lol). His 3.0 would get no better than my 4.0 when it was stock. Of course after I put 33s on it he got better but that was to be expected. oh, and my ranger still out ran it when it was on 33s lmao
__________________
2017 Ford Fiesta ST
2014 Ford Escape Titanium Ecoboost AWD
|
|
|
|
04-23-2014, 05:34 AM
|
|
4 Low too Sooth my Soul
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 4,584
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auburn Fan 02xlt 2wd
Let's just say if I would've had a choice I would've gone with 4.0. My 3.0 isn't too bad but a 4 would be much better
|
X2
__________________
02 Edge 3.0L 4X4 , 4.10 Ls gears.. Mickey Thompson Baja Claws , American Racing Baja Rims Flow Master 40 .
|
04-23-2014, 05:39 AM
|
|
ford dealer parts guy
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 20,938
|
|
Re: Pros and Cons of the 3.0 vs. 4.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by 01_ranger_4x4
Oh goody! A 3.0 vs 4.0 butthurt thread!
|
^^^^
__________________
2021 F150 5.0 Screw
Past:18 F150 2.7, 16 F150 5.0, 14 F150 5.0, 07 F150 5.4, 03 Ranger 4.0
Master Certified Ford Parts / Warranty Admin
|
|
|
|
04-23-2014, 07:33 AM
|
|
Ford Ranger Driver
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 562
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prages
I love my truck, but the 3.0 isn't a powerful or efficient motor. It's a 5 speed manual, and you often have to downshift going up any kind of hill on the interstate. It gets maybe 19 mpg doing mostly interstate driving.
My old 93 Explorer had a 4.0 with 5 speed manual, and it would run circles around my current Ranger, never had to downshift on the interstate, and got 20-22 mpg most of the time.
I also had an '89 Ranger with a 2.3 and 5 speed manual. It was severely underpowered (5th gear was pretty much useless unless you were going downhill with a strong tail wind), but it did get 26 or 27 mpg on the highway. It was also the only 2wd of the bunch, so that helped with the gas mileage.
|
The newer 2.3 duratecs are a pretty good engine compared to the old limas
__________________
2005 XL 2.3 (duratec), 15x8 American Racing Baja wheels, BFGoodrich 32x11.50 all terrains, 4.10 open diffs, CB/PA, ORI Baja Eliminator Lightbar(sold), Hella 500 Foglights, Fabtech upper control arms, camburg coil springs, Maxtrac "4" inch spindles and shackles, 32 inch Bfgoodrich AT's, Spyder Halo Headlights, custom rear tube bumper with integrated hitch, custom front prerunner bumper with skidplate, roadrunner fiberglass front fenders, pulled bedsides
|
|
|
|
04-23-2014, 08:55 AM
|
Ford Ranger Driver
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,574
|
|
Re: Pros and Cons of the 3.0 vs. 4.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2wdMuddin
The newer 2.3 duratecs are a pretty good engine compared to the old limas
|
My old Lima was a bullet proof little thing and got decent gas mileage, it just had no power.
__________________
2000 Ford Ranger XLT
Extended Cab
3.0 Flex
4x4
Manual Transmission
Offroad Package
|
04-23-2014, 10:27 AM
|
|
Ford Ranger Driver
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,268
|
|
If Ford had never offered the 3.0 in the Ranger they might still be building them today.
__________________
2004 Ext Cab, 4WD, 4.0, Auto, 154k. (4.0 engine is out of a 2009 Ranger w/96k) ( as of 7/1/2017)
2004 Ranger, Ext Cab, 2WD, 3.0, 5 speed , 4WABS, crank windows, no cruise, Edge 116k.(6/5,2014) (SOLD).
1999 Ford Ranger, Reg Cab, 2.5, 5 speed, 2WD, no AC, 150k (SOLD).
|
|
|
|
04-23-2014, 10:32 AM
|
|
Ford Ranger Driver
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 562
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by modelageek
If Ford had never offered the 3.0 in the Ranger they might still be building them today.
|
That's not really the case. In todays day and age everyone is wanting a full size truck. The mini truck world is kinda being dominated by toyota right now. And even their tacomas are becoming pretty big.
----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prages
My old Lima was a bullet proof little thing and got decent gas mileage, it just had no power.
|
I think the dohc gave it that extra boost of power it needed.
__________________
2005 XL 2.3 (duratec), 15x8 American Racing Baja wheels, BFGoodrich 32x11.50 all terrains, 4.10 open diffs, CB/PA, ORI Baja Eliminator Lightbar(sold), Hella 500 Foglights, Fabtech upper control arms, camburg coil springs, Maxtrac "4" inch spindles and shackles, 32 inch Bfgoodrich AT's, Spyder Halo Headlights, custom rear tube bumper with integrated hitch, custom front prerunner bumper with skidplate, roadrunner fiberglass front fenders, pulled bedsides
|
|
|
|
04-23-2014, 10:45 AM
|
|
Ford Ranger Driver
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,268
|
|
Re: Pros and Cons of the 3.0 vs. 4.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2wdMuddin
That's not really the case. In todays day and age everyone is wanting a full size truck. The mini truck world is kinda being dominated by toyota right now. And even their tacomas are becoming pretty big.
|
I disagree. Toyota was there for the taking with the rusty frame etc. The slow, crappy 3.0 with the syncro issue and bad heads, etc did the Ranger in.
Small trucks are still in. You can even buy a new Tacoma I4 4wd with an Auto now.
__________________
2004 Ext Cab, 4WD, 4.0, Auto, 154k. (4.0 engine is out of a 2009 Ranger w/96k) ( as of 7/1/2017)
2004 Ranger, Ext Cab, 2WD, 3.0, 5 speed , 4WABS, crank windows, no cruise, Edge 116k.(6/5,2014) (SOLD).
1999 Ford Ranger, Reg Cab, 2.5, 5 speed, 2WD, no AC, 150k (SOLD).
|
04-23-2014, 10:52 AM
|
|
ford dealer parts guy
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 20,938
|
|
Fullsize or nothing
__________________
2021 F150 5.0 Screw
Past:18 F150 2.7, 16 F150 5.0, 14 F150 5.0, 07 F150 5.4, 03 Ranger 4.0
Master Certified Ford Parts / Warranty Admin
|
04-23-2014, 11:23 AM
|
Ford Ranger Driver
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,574
|
|
Re: Pros and Cons of the 3.0 vs. 4.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by modelageek
I disagree. Toyota was there for the taking with the rusty frame etc. The slow, crappy 3.0 with the syncro issue and bad heads, etc did the Ranger in.
Small trucks are still in. You can even buy a new Tacoma I4 4wd with an Auto now.
|
What did the Ranger in was Ford spending their R&D budget on the F150 and not updating the Ranger for 15 years.
__________________
2000 Ford Ranger XLT
Extended Cab
3.0 Flex
4x4
Manual Transmission
Offroad Package
|
|
|
|
04-23-2014, 11:32 AM
|
|
Ford Ranger Driver
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,268
|
|
Re: Pros and Cons of the 3.0 vs. 4.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prages
What did the Ranger in was Ford spending their R&D budget on the F150 and not updating the Ranger for 15 years.
|
I agree. They knowingly put 3.0's with bad heads in the Ranger they did not give a bleep. Then toyota had the rust issue and Ford was not prepared.
----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by djfllmn
Fullsize or nothing
|
Ford and Toyota are working together on hybrid pickups.
Toyota also has a hybrid pickup called the A-BAT in the works.
If I was Toyota i would have already built a small hybrid truck. The battery power and generator gives it many uses besides the great gas mileage
__________________
2004 Ext Cab, 4WD, 4.0, Auto, 154k. (4.0 engine is out of a 2009 Ranger w/96k) ( as of 7/1/2017)
2004 Ranger, Ext Cab, 2WD, 3.0, 5 speed , 4WABS, crank windows, no cruise, Edge 116k.(6/5,2014) (SOLD).
1999 Ford Ranger, Reg Cab, 2.5, 5 speed, 2WD, no AC, 150k (SOLD).
Last edited by modelageek; 04-23-2014 at 11:37 AM.
|
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
|