• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Ford Ranger

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BZeto

Platinum Member
I'm looking to buy a pickup truck very soon and I'm pretty much set on the ext cab V6 Rangers. Can anyone vouch for either of these engines? I've heard the 3.0 is pretty much crap compared to the 4.0, any truth to this? Reasons I'm not exactly sure of, but if I recall one was the gas mileage being about the same yet the 4.0 puts out way more power. The 4.0's are definitely harder to find in my area, but there's a few out there.

Any input is welcome.

 
Both are great engines, and like you heard, the 4.0 is a beast in that little truck.
But the 3.0 is fine...just depends on how much you want it to "go fast".
 
I wouldn't do the 3.0 simply because the power output is not that much higher than the I4 but much lower fuel economy. When I was looking at Rangers I just looked at the 2.3L or the 4.0L
 
Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune
I wouldn't do the 3.0 simply because the power output is not that much higher than the I4 but much lower fuel economy. When I was looking at Rangers I just looked at the 2.3L or the 4.0L
Click to expand...

This is pretty much it. Both the 3.0 and the 4.0 are reliable engines, but the 3.0 basically has the fuel mileage of the 4.0 with the power of the 4-cylinder. Basically, the 3.0 is a solid engine, but if you're going to give up the power compared to the 4.0 then you're better off also getting the mileage of the 4-cylinder and if you're going to give up the mileage of the 4-cylinder you're better off getting the power of the 4.0.

ZV
 
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune
I wouldn't do the 3.0 simply because the power output is not that much higher than the I4 but much lower fuel economy. When I was looking at Rangers I just looked at the 2.3L or the 4.0L
Click to expand...

This is pretty much it. Both the 3.0 and the 4.0 are reliable engines, but the 3.0 basically has the fuel mileage of the 4.0 with the power of the 4-cylinder. Basically, the 3.0 is a solid engine, but if you're going to give up the power compared to the 4.0 then you're better off also getting the mileage of the 4-cylinder and if you're going to give up the mileage of the 4-cylinder you're better off getting the power of the 4.0.

ZV
Click to expand...

Flawless victory! As a former Ranger owner that says it all ^^. The only thing I'd add is that if you're looking at a Ranger, also look at the Mazda B-series pickups, they're about identical (same motors/tranny/etc). You'd be looking at the B2300 and B4000. That will give you some additional choices in your area.
 
Yeah, and you'll need the extra choices. The 3.0L by far is the most common engine option. When I was shopping new rangers they had 1 4.0L ranger, 11 3.0L rangers, and 8 2.3L rangers. No one wants the 4.0L because when they think big engine they thing horrible mileage. But the newer rangers with the 5 speed automatics fix that problem pretty good and I'd say they're mileage is great. In fact the 08-09 rangers with the 5 speed automatics get better mileage across the board, with the 4.0L getting better EPA mileage than the 3.0L with *alot* more power.
 
3.0 is gone for 2009-10, I believe.

In 2008 the 3.0 got better mileage than the 4.0 with the manual and the same with the auto, according to the EPA site.
 
Originally posted by: LTC8K6
In 2008 the 3.0 got better mileage than the 4.0 with the manual and the same with the auto, according to the EPA site.
Click to expand...

This is true for the 4WD and for the manual 2WD; however, the automatic 2WD 3.0L and automatic 2WD 4.0L are rated for the exact same mileage (15/20) according to fueleconomy.gov. Also, the manual 2WD 4.0L is rated to get the same mileage as the automatic. I know they're just ratings, but if the OP is looking for an automatic 2WD pickup, then these ratings are quite applicable.
 
Having owned a 3L 4WD Xtended cab many times on the HW I'd be wishing for more passing power
 
Originally posted by: kalrith
Originally posted by: LTC8K6
In 2008 the 3.0 got better mileage than the 4.0 with the manual and the same with the auto, according to the EPA site.
Click to expand...

This is true for the 4WD and for the manual 2WD; however, the automatic 2WD 3.0L and automatic 2WD 4.0L are rated for the exact same mileage (15/20) according to fueleconomy.gov. Also, the manual 2WD 4.0L is rated to get the same mileage as the automatic. I know they're just ratings, but if the OP is looking for an automatic 2WD pickup, then these ratings are quite applicable.
Click to expand...

Yes, but why did you basically just repeat what I wrote? 😀
 
Originally posted by: LTC8K6
Originally posted by: kalrith
Originally posted by: LTC8K6
In 2008 the 3.0 got better mileage than the 4.0 with the manual and the same with the auto, according to the EPA site.
Click to expand...

This is true for the 4WD and for the manual 2WD; however, the automatic 2WD 3.0L and automatic 2WD 4.0L are rated for the exact same mileage (15/20) according to fueleconomy.gov. Also, the manual 2WD 4.0L is rated to get the same mileage as the automatic. I know they're just ratings, but if the OP is looking for an automatic 2WD pickup, then these ratings are quite applicable.
Click to expand...

Yes, but why did you basically just repeat what I wrote? 😀
Click to expand...

Because I failed at reading 🙂.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top