Mileage as bad as a 4.0? - Ranger-Forums - The Ultimate Ford Ranger Resource


2.9L & 3.0L V6 Tech General discussion of 2.9L and 3.0L V6 Ford Ranger engines.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old 09-28-2010
95Rangerjunkie's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Orange, VA
Posts: 163
Icon5 Mileage as bad as a 4.0?

I've noticed that the 3.0 Ranger seems to get picked on quite a bit when compared to the 2.3 and 4.0. I've heard it called the "3 point slow" from time to time with folks saying that it's a solid long lasting engine, but it has the power of the 2.3 and gas mileage of the 4.0. Is there any truth to that at all?

I really like the look of the 4wd regular cab models and can't imagine such a little compact truck only getting 12-14 mpg highway even being an automatic. So basically what I'm getting at is what kind of real world gas mileage could one expect out of a 3.0 auto 4wd Ranger with a regular cab?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-28-2010
BlackRanger04's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Louisville,KY
Posts: 1,240
Icon4

Quote:
Originally Posted by 95Rangerjunkie View Post
I've noticed that the 3.0 Ranger seems to get picked on quite a bit when compared to the 2.3 and 4.0. I've heard it called the "3 point slow" from time to time with folks saying that it's a solid long lasting engine, but it has the power of the 2.3 and gas mileage of the 4.0. Is there any truth to that at all?

I really like the look of the 4wd regular cab models and can't imagine such a little compact truck only getting 12-14 mpg highway even being an automatic. So basically what I'm getting at is what kind of real world gas mileage could one expect out of a 3.0 auto 4wd Ranger with a regular cab?
Everything you heard about the 3.0 aka 3 point slow is the truth.
Avoid the 3.0 at all cost.
I have one in my truck now and as soon as I find a doner truck with a 4.0 SOHC the 3.0 will be rolled down the hill into my sink hole.
It has the power of a 2.3 or 2.5 and consumes almost as much fuel as a 4.0 OHV or SOHC.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-29-2010
darangerdanger's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: scappoose.oregon
Posts: 1,169
well i get 21 mpg in mine and it has plenty enough power to tow a 14' trailer with 2 quads in it so....don't believe everything people say about the 3.0
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-29-2010
darangerdanger's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: scappoose.oregon
Posts: 1,169
granted mine is opened up some lol. i get 3mpg better than stock with the intake and exhaust
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-29-2010
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Kenosha, Wi
Posts: 51
Back when I had a Taurus SHO they would sometimes call the Vulcan a SLOw,
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-29-2010
Red_Ak_Ranger's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 17,221
meh, it has okay power and good gas mileage. Better power than a 4cylinder for sure, although at the 4cylinder guys want you to believe that.

I've had both 3.0 and 4.0 and im very very happy im 4.0 now. But otherwise, if you dont care, its all good.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-29-2010
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Kenosha, Wi
Posts: 51
This is the SOHC 4.0 and DOHC 2.3: The 4.0 has 55 more horses and 60 more ft lbs of Tq. than a 3.0. a 3.0 has 10 more horses and 25 more ft lbs of tq. than a 2.3. A 3.0 only get 1-2 miles per gallon more than a 4.0, A 2.3 gets about 4-5 mpg more than a 3.0.

Last edited by EMB1230; 09-29-2010 at 03:12 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-29-2010
Scrambler82's Avatar
Old Guy Userů ltr
iTrader: (12)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 6,773
285’s - 33” tires, 4.10 gears and get approx 18 mpg all around.
Hills take away some of the forward movement, can lose 5 to 10 mph on a hill; need lower gears.

OEM 245’s tires was getting around 24 hy-way and thought the 3.0 wasn’t bad overall.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-29-2010
95Rangerjunkie's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Orange, VA
Posts: 163
Quote:
Originally Posted by EMB1230 View Post
This is the SOHC 4.0 and DOHC 2.3: The 4.0 has 55 more horses and 60 more ft lbs of Tq. than a 3.0. a 3.0 has 10 more horses and 25 more ft lbs of tq. than a 2.3. A 3.0 only get 1-2 miles per gallon more than a 4.0, A 2.3 gets about 4-5 mpg more than a 3.0.
Good to know. Thanks for the info fellas.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-29-2010
BlackRanger04's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Louisville,KY
Posts: 1,240
Icon7

Quote:
Originally Posted by EMB1230 View Post
This is the SOHC 4.0 and DOHC 2.3: The 4.0 has 55 more horses and 60 more ft lbs of Tq. than a 3.0. a 3.0 has 10 more horses and 25 more ft lbs of tq. than a 2.3. A 3.0 only get 1-2 miles per gallon more than a 4.0, A 2.3 gets about 4-5 mpg more than a 3.0.
"A 3.0 only gets 1-2 miles per gallon more than a 4.0"

I think that alone should be enough to keep you away from a 3.0 ...lol
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-29-2010
Jp7's Avatar
Jp7 Jp7 is offline
Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: My LED lab or on the dyno
Posts: 2,970
I like my 3.0. I can retime the engine with my eyes closed and it feels peppier than my 2.3. I get 21-22mpg usually. If I were forced to get either the 3.0 or 4.0 I would still get the 3.0. I don't like the idea of having to pull the engine to reset the timing.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-29-2010
BlackRanger04's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Louisville,KY
Posts: 1,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jp7 View Post
I like my 3.0. I can retime the engine with my eyes closed and it feels peppier than my 2.3. I get 21-22mpg usually. If I were forced to get either the 3.0 or 4.0 I would still get the 3.0. I don't like the idea of having to pull the engine to reset the timing.
You've either been smokin crack ... or you just don't know any better.
FYI ... You don't have to pull the 4.0 OHV to reset the timing.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-29-2010
Jp7's Avatar
Jp7 Jp7 is offline
Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: My LED lab or on the dyno
Posts: 2,970
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRanger04 View Post
You've either been smokin crack ... or you just don't know any better.
FYI ... You don't have to pull the 4.0 OHV to reset the timing.
The 4.0 I'm talking about is the SOHC one.

The 3.0 has plenty of power for how I drive the truck.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-29-2010
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Kenosha, Wi
Posts: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRanger04 View Post
"A 3.0 only gets 1-2 miles per gallon more than a 4.0"

I think that alone should be enough to keep you away from a 3.0 ...lol
Yeah, at the VERY most maybe 3 mpg more, lol. In a Taurus, they get 20 city/30 hwy easy, hard to believe, huh?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-29-2010
IndianScout's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 90
love my 4.0 lots of power and decent mileage
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-29-2010
BlackRanger04's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Louisville,KY
Posts: 1,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndianScout View Post
love my 4.0 lots of power and decent mileage
Thank You
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-29-2010
BlackRanger04's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Louisville,KY
Posts: 1,240
Icon7

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jp7 View Post
The 4.0 I'm talking about is the SOHC one.

The 3.0 has plenty of power for how I drive the truck.
How you drive? Do you drive like you're 97 years old?
Are you 97 years old? If so ... I'm sorry
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-29-2010
Jp7's Avatar
Jp7 Jp7 is offline
Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: My LED lab or on the dyno
Posts: 2,970
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRanger04 View Post
How you drive? Do you drive like you're 97 years old?
Are you 97 years old? If so ... I'm sorry
31 years old. I drive like an adult in my trucks. If I want to have fun, I drive my IX.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-29-2010
BlackRanger04's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Louisville,KY
Posts: 1,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jp7 View Post
31 years old. I drive like an adult in my trucks. If I want to have fun, I drive my IX.
I drive like an adult in my truck too ... I just don't like it when a Geo Metro blows my doors off. This never happened when I had my 94 Ranger with a 4.0 OHV
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-05-2010
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: cotati
Posts: 5
3.0 economy

Its true "sometimes". Old 93 reg cab 2.3/5spd, 3.55s got 22.5-23 city/hiway; 2000 3.0 4dr automatic/3.73 gets 18-19 same driving. Definitely more power, maybe partly because of 3000 stall converter. Both 2wd
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 10-05-2010
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: cotati
Posts: 5
3.0 economy

Its true "sometimes". Old 93 reg cab 2.3/5spd, 3.55s got 22.5-23 city/hiway; 2000 3.0 4dr automatic/3.73 gets 18-19 same driving. Definitely more power, maybe partly because of 3000 stall converter. Both 2wd. Havent driven 4.0 yet cant compare the power im sure its better.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-05-2010
vista4.0's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Beaver Falls, PA
Posts: 2,824
4.0 SOHC with 3.73s and 265/70/16 tires i was getting 19-20 combined mpgs. As much as 24mpg on the highway and never any lower than 17mpg city.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-05-2010
darangerdanger's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: scappoose.oregon
Posts: 1,169
Well my mpg's on this tank went down lol. Open day at woodburn dragstrip :D no trees or times just straight racing :) I'm at 90 miles on a half tank today bahaha. The little 3.0 held her own today though it was a blast!
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 10-06-2010
red_rider's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Port Byron, IL
Posts: 346
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRanger04 View Post
I drive like an adult in my truck too ... I just don't like it when a Geo Metro blows my doors off. This never happened when I had my 94 Ranger with a 4.0 OHV
If nothing else, the 3.0 is better down low than my 2.3 lima, which leads me to believe that it would accelerate better over the low (and probably high) rpms. And even I can keep up with Metros, although school buses are a little tougher :)
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-06-2010
wckzac's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: whiteseboro ny
Posts: 65
I love my 3.0 has plenty of power for me and i get about 20 mpg and i drive it like a maniac
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
bad gas mileage? 2XRAD Ranger General Technical & Electrical 32 12-10-2010 07:46 PM
The_Dealer: Bad Deal Bad Member Bad Sell! LayingFrame89 Ranger Products, Company, & Member Reviews 34 12-01-2007 07:59 AM
Stock Drivesaft with RCD = BAD BAD BAD PICS INSIDE ranger General Ford Ranger Discussion 32 07-31-2007 12:50 PM
Really bad gas mileage ? ks ranger 2.9L & 3.0L V6 Tech 2 10-25-2006 10:09 AM
ALL offroaders are BAD BAD BAD! FMD General Ford Ranger Discussion 13 04-25-2006 08:21 AM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:56 PM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.