It's the cost of changing the Ranger. It's the problem that Ford has been fighting for a long time - they do not redesign/update enough their best selling vehicles until it is too late. That is what killed the Taurus and let the Camry take it's spot. The Ranger is pretty cheap for Ford right now - nothing mechanically has really changed since the 4.0 SOHC was introduced, and the
3.0 is roughly the same since it's introduction (only mild changes). Also, with the same rumor that has been flying around for years now (the end of the Ranger), it's often difficult for them to justify updating the current platform too drastically. Maybe Ford will change it to the 3.5L, but it is unlikely.

 

im really excited about this... i cant wait to test one of these motors out..

 

it just surprises me that all of us with 4.0's have a lil pansy engine, and some new ghey suv gets a smaller engine with alot more power, WTF

 

It's a bump in technology but with that bump is extra cost. Take cams. The original motors had one camshaft. The SOHC has two camshafts. A DOHC is gonna have FOUR camshafts. Along with the four camshafts you generally will get two extra valves per cylinder for a tolal of four.

Thats where the extra power comes from. The extra valves and the higher revving from the 4 cams. There are no lifters since the rockers basically sit on the cams. The lifters are usually the weak point when over revving an engine.

Past that, all the duratechs in vehicles now are probably sideways for FWD applications. Mating a tranny to a rwd is is gonna cost some money.

 

So Ford keeps their (slower, weaker, dated) design because it's cheap.

So is that what the ranger is? Just a cheap small p/u?

I find myself interested in the toyota 1/4 ton p/u's more and more. The inline 4's (although don't make as much power) surely feel more efficient in their power delivery and seem to last forever.


like I said before, my parent's minivan has much more power/torque than the ranger...so ranger's aren't necessarily the best (quality/power) truck in its class, it's just the cheapest for ford to make?

why not get one of those dohc jap suv's that make more powe then?

 

The Ranger and B series fill a niche... Small, cheap, with options for some moderate power, but mostly for people who like trucks but will really only use it around the house and to go to the grocery store. If you want some power, or need a work truck, Ford wants you to buy a more expensive F150 or 250

 

in a decade where Domestic vehicles seem to be showing their weakness compared to imports, it would be a very bold and dangerous move for ford to blow a lot of money to change the Ranger and B-series design more than slightly cosmetically. Most Americans, and unfortunately most Ranger owners wouldn't consider this new engine worth buying a brand new vehicle even if it is a nice upgrade.

also I'm wondering how this FWD engine is supposed to go into a mustang...

 

Yes, exactly. Like said in other posts, it fills a niche. It's cheap, reliable, easy to maintain, and readily available for fleet use. Just the way it is.

 

Ohhhhhhh ****, time to buy acouple Rangers and store them for when I'm older

 

Personally Im more interested in a sport trec for the 292hp 4.6 thats in it. If Ford moved the ranger to a midsize truck with 275hp or something id be all over it.

 

The 3.5L V6 will also be standard on the 2008 Ford Five Hundred at 260 hp. What's more interesting is that the guy is renaming it "Taurus", the once popular sedan. It won't save Ford's *** like 21 years ago but it's still cool.

 

The engine and drive line in the edge was co-designed with GM and will be in the new GMC arcadia as well. They all have different power ranges. I guess the good ole Amercians finally decided it was America vs. the world, not Ford vs. GM.

 

5.0 swap..