General Ford Ranger Discussion General discussion of the Ford Ranger that does not fit in any other sub-forum.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: DashLynx

3.0L vs. 4.0L

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #1  
Old 03-31-2011
Mazda Beast's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Gladstone, OR
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Icon5 3.0L vs. 4.0L

My current truck got smashed a couple weeks ago so I'm looking to buy another truck. I wanna upgrade to a 4x4 and I was wondering what your thoughts were between the two motors. I have a tent trailer that I would like to pull with it and I was wondering if you thought that the 3.0L will be strong enough to pull it. I've talked to some people and they were saying that the 3.0L was a little gutless. I haven't test drove any yet so I'm just wondering what your thoughts were between the two. Thanks for the time!!!
 
  #2  
Old 03-31-2011
stroken7.3's Avatar
Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Harrisville, UT
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I would get the 4.0L, more hp and more tq.
 
  #3  
Old 03-31-2011
Timberwolf's Avatar
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: East coast Canada
Posts: 706
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Wirelessly posted (Timberwolf)

^yup
 
  #4  
Old 03-31-2011
djt's Avatar
djt
djt is offline
Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: macon ga
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
To me the 3.0 was sluggish and that was without a load. My 4.0 has hauled alot of things and the pickup was still there when i needed it
 
  #5  
Old 03-31-2011
JKoegel's Avatar
Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
For just a mere 1 or 2 MPG's difference you might as well get the 4.0. More power is always a good thing.
 
  #6  
Old 03-31-2011
Masteratarms93's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Goose Creek SC
Posts: 4,685
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
In my book there are 2 engines when I look at Rangers. 4 cylinders for economy and DDing. 4.0 SOHCs for 4x4s and everything else. 3.0s aren't even in consideration.
 
  #7  
Old 03-31-2011
FMD's Avatar
FMD
FMD is offline
Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Amherst NY
Posts: 3,873
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
I agree with what others have stated. with a 4x4 and a bigger engine opens more doors, and more oppertunities for you. With a 4x4 you can do more with your truck, which can make your life easier, you said you want to do a bit of towing as well. the 4.0 will definitely help with that.

I never had a 3.0 just the 4.0 and while at times I wish it had MORE power I am pretty happy with it.

But also, something to consider, you could get an F150 with the 4.6 v8 which is a much larger truck, way more roomy, weighs about the same, has 2 extra cylinders and gets the same mpg as a ranger. Its also generally prices comparatively.
 
  #8  
Old 03-31-2011
djfllmn's Avatar
Ford parts guy
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: PA
Posts: 6,013
Likes: 0
Received 37 Likes on 30 Posts
i actually get better mileage with my 4.0 than my buddy that has a 3.slow ranger...they stopped offering the 3.0 for a reason
 
  #9  
Old 03-31-2011
BLK02's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: BC
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Like he said ^ they stopped offering the 3.0 for a reason. Ive owned both and the 4.0 is superior in every way, gas mileage for me was the same.
 
  #10  
Old 03-31-2011
Mazda Beast's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Gladstone, OR
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ok thanks guys thats really cool and gives me something to think about when i go to spend that insurance money :)
 
  #11  
Old 03-31-2011
Mazda Beast's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Gladstone, OR
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
also what kind of gas mileage do you guys get with your 4.0's? I've looked online at their mileage and they are posted 15-19 and i was wondering if those were accurate numbers or if you get different from that.
 
  #12  
Old 03-31-2011
morris's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: South Detroit.
Posts: 7,841
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
yea. i seem to get 17ish in winter city driving. i can't wait for summer and non winter gas.
 
  #13  
Old 03-31-2011
05blackranger's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Mequon, WI
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
I think they are both good engines even though they get about the same mileage. I have driven both and really like both. I like that the 3.0 has more low end grunt whereas the 4.0 needs to get up in the rpms a bit more. I have only ever driven both with a manual 5spd though so I have no idea how they are with automatics.
 
  #14  
Old 03-31-2011
01_ranger_4x4's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Muskegon, Michigan
Posts: 3,585
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by 05blackranger
I think they are both good engines even though they get about the same mileage. I have driven both and really like both. I like that the 3.0 has more low end grunt whereas the 4.0 needs to get up in the rpms a bit more. I have only ever driven both with a manual 5spd though so I have no idea how they are with automatics.
lol at the 3.0 having "low end grunt" ha ha ha ha ha its a great motor but has nothing i would ever refer to as "grunt" anywhere in the RPM range. lol the 3.0 makes almost 60 less FT pounds of torque 500 RPM's higher in the RPM range than the 4.0 SOHC and 40 less than the 4.0 OHV at nearly 1000 RPM's higher in the RPM range.
 
  #15  
Old 03-31-2011
05blackranger's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Mequon, WI
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by 01_ranger_4x4
lol at the 3.0 having "low end grunt" ha ha ha ha ha its a great motor but has nothing i would ever refer to as "grunt" anywhere in the RPM range. lol the 3.0 makes almost 60 less FT pounds of torque 500 RPM's higher in the RPM range than the 4.0 SOHC and 40 less than the 4.0 OHV at nearly 1000 RPM's higher in the RPM range.
You are definitely right about the 4.0 having more power at a lower rpm. I meant that when driving the 3.0 it feels like their is more torque at lower rpms (a shallower slope on a torque vs. rpm diagram than the 4.0). The 4.0 feels like it has very little torque at all at lower rpms compared to at around 3k when it makes its most power. I don't have a torque diagram though so I have no idea if what I think I feel is true. Let me know if you can find one cause I am kind of interested.
 
  #16  
Old 03-31-2011
01_ranger_4x4's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Muskegon, Michigan
Posts: 3,585
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by 05blackranger
You are definitely right about the 4.0 having more power at a lower rpm. I meant that when driving the 3.0 it feels like their is more torque at lower rpms (a shallower slope on a torque vs. rpm diagram than the 4.0). The 4.0 feels like it has very little torque at all at lower rpms compared to at around 3k when it makes its most power. I don't have a torque diagram though so I have no idea if what I think I feel is true. Let me know if you can find one cause I am kind of interested.
ok i get what youre saying now. ill see if i can find one.
 
  #17  
Old 03-31-2011
deserttrans's Avatar
Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Go 4.0 if you pull something....
 
  #18  
Old 03-31-2011
07rangersport's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Maple Ridge CANADA
Posts: 800
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
I used to pull this with a 4.0. The truck never even noticed it. It weighs about 1400 pounds all loaded up.
 
  #19  
Old 03-31-2011
Froggmann's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Bloomington, MN
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
If you plan on towing on a regular basis, go with the 4.0.
 




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:00 PM.