Tom Morana! - Page 3 - 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
  #51  
Old 11-27-2009
Sixt9coug's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Norwalk, CA
Posts: 1,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by StrangerRanger View Post
This whole thread makes me giggle...

You know why I didn't get a 4.0? Because I enjoy getting an average of 23 mpg in the city.

I wanna see your 4.0 do that.

Sure you might be quicker, but that's nothing a re-gear wont solve for me. I will take bulletproof reliability over horsepower every day.


Ive had a 3.0 and a 4.0 so i might have a little experience with both of them. Im not the only one on here thats had both but hey ill chime in anyway.

3.0 was better on fuel than my 4.0. Not much though. I NEVER got anywhere close to 23mpg averages in the city. I got on average around 20mpg combined with a K&N setup, Mobile ! and the rest stock as hell. Putting on 235/75 15s dropped that to 19mpg on average. The 4.0 gets around 18mpg combined on average. Stock as a rock aside from Mobile 1 in there.

4.0 is smoother at idle and any other engine speed
4.0 is more powerful except directly off idle. Im sure the gearing differences account for some of that. The 3.0 was a manual with 3.73s.The 4.0 is an auto with 3.55s.
4.0 is quieter.
4.0 has an oil filter i can get to without burning my man sized hands.


So basically... potential reliability may be the only saving grace for the 3.0 versus 4.0. EVERYTHING about the 4.0 is better having owned BOTH. I expect the milage to be a wash, as i have an auto now versus the manual in the old truck.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 11-27-2009
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: unknown
Posts: 890
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sixt9coug View Post
Ive had a 3.0 and a 4.0 so i might have a little experience with both of them. Im not the only one on here thats had both but hey ill chime in anyway.

3.0 was better on fuel than my 4.0. Not much though. I NEVER got anywhere close to 23mpg averages in the city. I got on average around 20mpg combined with a K&N setup, Mobile ! and the rest stock as hell. Putting on 235/75 15s dropped that to 19mpg on average. The 4.0 gets around 18mpg combined on average. Stock as a rock aside from Mobile 1 in there.

4.0 is smoother at idle and any other engine speed
4.0 is more powerful except directly off idle. Im sure the gearing differences account for some of that. The 3.0 was a manual with 3.73s.The 4.0 is an auto with 3.55s.
4.0 is quieter.
4.0 has an oil filter i can get to without burning my man sized hands.


So basically... potential reliability may be the only saving grace for the 3.0 versus 4.0. EVERYTHING about the 4.0 is better having owned BOTH. I expect the milage to be a wash, as i have an auto now versus the manual in the old truck.
I have to agree with this. I've owned the both 3.0, as well as both versions of the 4.0. The 4.0 SOHC was alot smoother idle and not as quick on the throttle but it had alot more torque than the 3.0. The same can't be said for the 4.0 DOHC. That damn thing stayed in the shop and always for the same problem (Valvetrain and head gaskets). The 3.0 with a manual trans is pretty good especially with 4.10:1 gear ratios. The SOHC had 3.73:1 and the DOHC had 3.55:1 ratios. The DOHC got alot better gas mpgs when I first got it. After the first major repair it went down hill. Your rear gears determine how fast you can run before you see any major fuel consumption and at what RPMs as well. with the 4.10:1 gear ratios anything over 65 mph your fuel mpgs drop like a lead brick. Also it depends on what tire size you use and what type as well. Right now I'm getting 21 in the city and 27 on interstate and I have out driven several high performance cars and trucks. Not out ran but out driven. There is a difference. Mostly due to driver error if you're wondering. I'm running the stock P235-75-R15 tire size and I've only used the K&N direct O.E.M replacement air filter and changed the exhaust.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 11-27-2009
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: unknown
Posts: 890
here's what tires I got on the rear of my truck. I spent a shade under $200.00 mounting and balancing included.

Name:  100_0266.jpg
Views: 14
Size:  184.4 KB

Here's the exhaust. It's a Cherrybomb Glass pack with 2 inch inlet and outlet. and it really rumbles. Before you put it on take an Oxyaccetaline Rosebud torch and where it say inlet on the glass pack burn out the glass inside the muffler. Reverse it when you install it right off the header and people will know you're coming. Just be sure you go 8 inches behind the cab and you'll see results. Also lower your tailgate or purchase a tonneau cover this will also help with your fuel economy and performance.

Name:  100_0267.jpg
Views: 25
Size:  236.8 KB

The Tire size is indeed the stock size. I also spent over $400.00 on brakepads and rotors the stock size but better performing ones from NAPA. P235-75-R15 Goodyear Wintermark tires if you're wondering. There's alot of things out there that you can do with a 3.0 V6 duratech engine as well as the 4.0. To run down the 3.0 is not good which is basicly what I've been seeing in here. Seems like everyone is looking at the glass 1/2 empty instead of 1/2 full. I think Ford should put both of these engines into a 4 banger Focus and keep the same set up on the ranger and add a V8 to it instead. That 3.0 V6 as well as the 4.0 SOHC is pushing too much weight and really straining the 3.0 too much. The V6 Rangers Have a 4,500 plus LBS gross vehicle weight rating and thats not hauling anything. You to pull a trailer or haul a decent size load of wood how much more is that little V6 pushing. That's what I think Ford needs to do.

Last edited by knightmare1015; 11-27-2009 at 02:35 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 11-27-2009
Fx4wannabe01's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (23)
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Boring, Oregon
Posts: 21,721
It's been scientifically proven that dropping the tailgate doesn't do squat to improve mileage....more like it decreases mileage. Tonneau helps...but you're bringing up subjects that aren't in line with the thread. Try to keep it on topic.


Quote:
Originally Posted by knightmare1015 View Post
I have to agree with this. I've owned the both 3.0, as well as both versions of the 4.0. The 4.0 SOHC was alot smoother idle and not as quick on the throttle but it had alot more torque than the 3.0. The same can't be said for the 4.0 DOHC. That damn thing stayed in the shop and always for the same problem (Valvetrain and head gaskets). The 3.0 with a manual trans is pretty good especially with 4.10:1 gear ratios. The SOHC had 3.73:1 and the DOHC had 3.55:1 ratios. The DOHC got alot better gas mpgs when I first got it. After the first major repair it went down hill. Your rear gears determine how fast you can run before you see any major fuel consumption and at what RPMs as well. with the 4.10:1 gear ratios anything over 65 mph your fuel mpgs drop like a lead brick. Also it depends on what tire size you use and what type as well. Right now I'm getting 21 in the city and 27 on interstate and I have out driven several high performance cars and trucks. Not out ran but out driven. There is a difference. Mostly due to driver error if you're wondering. I'm running the stock P235-75-R15 tire size and I've only used the K&N direct O.E.M replacement air filter and changed the exhaust.
Please enlighten us to this DOHC you're talking about...




Don't get me started on gear ratios and engine's being in their powerband....

What do you mean by 'i outdrove several high performance cars and trucks' ????

Last edited by Fx4wannabe01; 11-27-2009 at 03:02 AM. Reason: think before you type....what I typed made no sense before. lol.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 11-27-2009
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: unknown
Posts: 890
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fx4wannabe01 View Post
It's been scientifically proven that dropping the tailgate doesn't do squat to improve mileage....more like it decreases mileage. Tonneau helps...but you're bringing up subjects that aren't in line with the thread. Try to keep it on topic.




Please enlighten us to this DOHC you're talking about...




Don't get me started on gear ratios and engine's being in their powerband....

What do you mean by 'i outdrove several high performance cars and trucks' ????
Back in the Mid 90's the Ford ranger had several motors to choose from. they had 2 versions of the 4.0 and the 3.0 Vulcan and a 4 cylinder. The reason I say out drove, is because the cars and trucks I beat the drivers didn't know how to drive it correctly is what I meant. As for the mpg proof, That's on my truck now. When I first got it yes you're right dropping the tailgate doesn't help, but it does now because the torsion bar front end on it needs new bushings and has really began sag very badly. I might later on convert coilovers and go with a 3 link panhard rod set up later on when I start my projects. I'll try to stay on topic as much as I can though. Sorry about that. I didn't mean every truck on the tailgate bit just mine. The time frame I'm talking about is when Ford dropped the 2.9 liter V6 and came out with the 3.0 Vulcan and ford tried to exp with new valvetrain technology. Check your LMC Truck Catalog history section on the ranger. This truck goes all the way back to 1982 and first sold as a 1983 model. That section will most of the major changes made to the ranger. The problem I had out of the 4.0 DOHC was ford had a habbit of using poorly constructed Valvesprings that tend break way too quickly and the same with the headgaskets. They had a habbit of cracking. The headgaskets we used after seeing poor quality ones were made of copper (aftermarket if you're wondering). We couldn't do a damn thing with the valvetrain. We tried at that time every Valvespring known to man and still couldn't get it to work properly. And what do you mean don't get you started on GEAR RATIOS? That's on my truck, I know what it needs and where my powerband is on my truck. I ought to know considering I drive it daily. Each truck is different and has it's own personality yours may handle different have a different engine and trans different suspension etc. I know what my truck can and can't do.

Last edited by knightmare1015; 11-27-2009 at 03:35 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 11-27-2009
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: unknown
Posts: 890
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fx4wannabe01 View Post
It's been scientifically proven that dropping the tailgate doesn't do squat to improve mileage....more like it decreases mileage. Tonneau helps...but you're bringing up subjects that aren't in line with the thread. Try to keep it on topic.




Please enlighten us to this DOHC you're talking about...




Don't get me started on gear ratios and engine's being in their powerband....

What do you mean by 'i outdrove several high performance cars and trucks' ????
I'll stay on topic but you must keep the peace. Please don't try to tell me what my truck can or can't do when you aint drove it. If we meet I might let you take a look at it and drive it (with me in the jump seat of course) and then you can give me tips on what would best to do with it. I aint being mean or anything but I am asking you to do this for now. What I was talking about is getting a feel for your Ranger. Only you can tell what your ranger needs, can or can't do. I just have a different philisofic approach is all. I have learned in my absense from here that closeminded people tend to be stubborn and hatefull. I am none of those things. I have learned to keep an open mind, so if I'm off a bit I apologize. Please feel free to correct my info a bit but in a friendly manner.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 11-27-2009
Fx4wannabe01's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (23)
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Boring, Oregon
Posts: 21,721
I don't doubt your driving 'skills', but I find your equipment hard to believe with your claims. Shoot...for all I know you're talking Ford Escorts or Toyota Corollas.


The only 4.0L DOHC found under the hood of a Ford related vehicle of any vintage is in a brand new Land Rover. 4.0L OHV and 4.0L SOHC were the only 4.0 offerings in RBV's. You're wrong.




*i edited this quite a bit...it was quite long. but now i read your other post(above), and axed alot out. I'm not posting to 'attack' you, just get your facts straight before posting...nothing worse than an illinformed person spouting out info thats just wrong...

(not saying you are one...i'm just saying in general...)

Last edited by Fx4wannabe01; 11-27-2009 at 04:09 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 11-27-2009
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: unknown
Posts: 890
Icon6

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fx4wannabe01 View Post
I don't doubt your driving 'skills', but I find your equipment hard to believe with your claims. Shoot...for all I know you're talking Ford Escorts or Toyota Corollas.



The only 4.0L DOHC found under the hood of a Ford related vehicle of any vintage is in a brand new Land Rover. 4.0L OHV and 4.0L SOHC were the only 4.0 offerings in RBV's. You're wrong.


*i edited this quite a bit...it was quite long. but now i read your other post, and axed alot out. I'm not posting to 'attack' you, just get your facts straight before posting...nothing worse than an illinformed person spouting out info thats just wrong...
Oh ok. Sorry about that. I must've looked at my LMC truck catalog wrong. In fact just looked over it again just a minute or 2 ago and realize I did oops. I'm glad you're not attacking me it was that old mentallity I had with the previous time here. Youre right my apologies man. But then again, the ranger I looked at not long ago must've done a swap. I've been going to truck and car shows and see what's out there in terms of light duty truck trends and swaps to get a better feel of what I want. I did see a track use only S10 dimer with big block installed. And on the cover of Car Craft Magazine (December 2009 issue) you'll find a killer prosrteet ranger. It's on page 76 with what technology he used and so forth. Once again my apologies dude. Concerning my truck though, the front suspension on my ranger really needs alot of work. It's worn out basicly it saggs way too much. I lowered the tailgate to try and help myself out a bit at the fuel pump and plus I do need 2 new front tires. The ones I have are the stock ones that came on the truck. That says it all there don't it. Come tax time I'll try to get the set I got this past winter on the front. Plus I'm looking at different suspension options as well.

Last edited by knightmare1015; 11-27-2009 at 04:26 AM. Reason: Additonal info concerning my ranger...
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 11-27-2009
StrangerRanger's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The 253
Posts: 756
Go to discovery.com and see if you can watch the tail gate gas mileage show by mythbusters.

Dropping the tailgate is bad. You need that pocket of turbulence in the truck bed for the rest of the air flow to ride over to keep your drag coefficient down. Without that pocket the air drops back heavily and there is a higher drag on the vehicle causing worse mpg.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 11-27-2009
Robin Hood's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: AZ
Posts: 789
Holy **** can you guys keep it on topic for more than like 2 posts?
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 11-27-2009
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: unknown
Posts: 890
Quote:
Originally Posted by StrangerRanger View Post
Go to discovery.com and see if you can watch the tail gate gas mileage show by mythbusters.

Dropping the tailgate is bad. You need that pocket of turbulence in the truck bed for the rest of the air flow to ride over to keep your drag coefficient down. Without that pocket the air drops back heavily and there is a higher drag on the vehicle causing worse mpg.
I said my truck. You didn't read what I posted earlier. The front suspension on my ranger is worn out period. The reason it sags so much is because I hit a deer in 2005 and the bodyshop that my insurance sent me to botched it up and not mention years of wear and tear and I need a new front suspension. I didn't say everyones truck just mine. I just used the wrong words.

Last edited by knightmare1015; 11-27-2009 at 11:18 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 11-27-2009
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: unknown
Posts: 890
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Hood View Post
Holy **** can you guys keep it on topic for more than like 2 posts?
I would love to if he didn't bring that up. He didn't read my earlier posts. My ranger is ragged out and needs repair and I'm interested in new engine options. This caught my eye and I thought I would check it out it. So far it aint looking good for this option as far as my ranger is concerned. I have ruled it out. I'm sticking with my original plan.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 11-27-2009
Fx4wannabe01's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (23)
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Boring, Oregon
Posts: 21,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Hood View Post
Holy **** can you guys keep it on topic for more than like 2 posts?
Yeah, no **** Robin Hood.

(even if I contibuted to offtopicness).


Back to 3.0's please....not mileage, what's wrong with someones truck, thinking out loud, rambling on...and so on and so forth...
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 11-27-2009
Rapala's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 826
anyone installed his 1.8 rockers yet? just curious.....
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 11-28-2009
MudSlanger's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,462
Ok guys, here's the deal.. These trucks only came with certain types of motors. YES they are slow. Is there ways of making them go faster, YES. Is there other options for other motors(motor swaps), YES but this is not always an option).

With that being said, these are the motors we have to deal with. Its the choices people make when trying to add performance to their motors. Intake, roller rockers, headers, exhaust, pulleys, port & polish heads, cams, stroker kits, ignition, xcal tunes, gears, ect..

Some people are limited to their performance. I dont think a lot of people want 1000horsepower vehicles but they would love a reliable motor that has enough power and has semi-decent gas mileage. Not everyone makes a lot of money and a lot of people(well most people) cant afford motor swaps or have the time for them or the know how. Their next best thing is fix up the motor they have because thats our very limited option. I mean you can swap any motor in to any vehicle with money and metal fabrication skills but lets be real here, not everyone has that skill or the money to do so. There is a 5.0 option for the ranger but that means redoing wiring and buying adapters and resizing driveshafts and other little things needed to make the swap work, like said before, not everyone has that skill or the know how. Bolt on performance parts for the 3.0 or 4.0 is options for alot of people on this site so thats what they do, its somewhat easy and affordable in most cases. If we had a wider range of options(motorwise) then i would say sell the truck and just buy a ranger already equiped with the 5.0 in it, that will solve all your problems. But we dont have the luxury. These are the cards we are dealt with and some or a lot of people on this site make the best of it.

I and a very few people on this site have the know-how or money or skills to do a 5.0 swap. I was sorta forced to do a motor swap since i blew up my 3.0. I had the money and i was lucky enough to have been doing research for a few months to do the 5.0 swap, so i went for it because it was the perfect time. If this 3.0 didnt explode, there was a great possibility that i was going to install a supercharger on the 3.0 before it died. This was the motor i was dealt with so i wanted to see the potential of this motor.

Ford installed a turd(3.0) in a ranger and i was gonna polish it but it was my decision to do so. Any motor has the potential to be a monster, its just how much money you want to spend or how many parts are built for it. Luckily there are vendors out there still producing aftermarket parts for the 3.0 guys because they know the motor is still around and im sure they know alot of guys who own them think they are slow.

To tell the truth, if i still had the 3.0 motor, you bet your *** i would have bought that supercharger manifold for the 3.0. Im an opportunist and i LOVE to prove the nah-sayers wrong. I have no hate for someone trying to build a motor. Its not my motor and i will high five anyone who tries.

Edit: LJ, let me know when you are ready for that supercharger.. if we have to, then lets go get a body lift for your truck if the superchager sits too high on top of the motor. I got lots of parts for you for the supercharger so ill help you out on a lot of your project. MAF, throttle body, colder spark plugs, ect. Its collecting dust so they are yours if you want them buddy.

Last edited by MudSlanger; 11-28-2009 at 12:36 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 11-28-2009
sickranger3.0's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Pensacola, FL.
Posts: 148
^ nicely said!!! btw im m90 supercharging mine hopefully this summer.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 11-28-2009
Robin Hood's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: AZ
Posts: 789
Quote:
Originally Posted by MudSlanger View Post
Ok guys, here's the deal.. These trucks only came with certain types of motors. YES they are slow. Is there ways of making them go faster, YES. Is there other options for other motors(motor swaps), YES but this is not always an option).

With that being said, these are the motors we have to deal with. Its the choices people make when trying to add performance to their motors. Intake, roller rockers, headers, exhaust, pulleys, port & polish heads, cams, stroker kits, ignition, xcal tunes, gears, ect..

Some people are limited to their performance. I dont think a lot of people want 1000horsepower vehicles but they would love a reliable motor that has enough power and has semi-decent gas mileage. Not everyone makes a lot of money and a lot of people(well most people) cant afford motor swaps or have the time for them or the know how. Their next best thing is fix up the motor they have because thats our very limited option. I mean you can swap any motor in to any vehicle with money and metal fabrication skills but lets be real here, not everyone has that skill or the money to do so. There is a 5.0 option for the ranger but that means redoing wiring and buying adapters and resizing driveshafts and other little things needed to make the swap work, like said before, not everyone has that skill or the know how. Bolt on performance parts for the 3.0 or 4.0 is options for alot of people on this site so thats what they do, its somewhat easy and affordable in most cases. If we had a wider range of options(motorwise) then i would say sell the truck and just buy a ranger already equiped with the 5.0 in it, that will solve all your problems. But we dont have the luxury. These are the cards we are dealt with and some or a lot of people on this site make the best of it.

I and a very few people on this site have the know-how or money or skills to do a 5.0 swap. I was sorta forced to do a motor swap since i blew up my 3.0. I had the money and i was lucky enough to have been doing research for a few months to do the 5.0 swap, so i went for it because it was the perfect time. If this 3.0 didnt explode, there was a great possibility that i was going to install a supercharger on the 3.0 before it died. This was the motor i was dealt with so i wanted to see the potential of this motor.

Ford installed a turd(3.0) in a ranger and i was gonna polish it but it was my decision to do so. Any motor has the potential to be a monster, its just how much money you want to spend or how many parts are built for it. Luckily there are vendors out there still producing aftermarket parts for the 3.0 guys because they know the motor is still around and im sure they know alot of guys who own them think they are slow.

To tell the truth, if i still had the 3.0 motor, you bet your *** i would have bought that supercharger manifold for the 3.0. Im an opportunist and i LOVE to prove the nah-sayers wrong. I have no hate for someone trying to build a motor. Its not my motor and i will high five anyone who tries.

Edit: LJ, let me know when you are ready for that supercharger.. if we have to, then lets go get a body lift for your truck if the superchager sits too high on top of the motor. I got lots of parts for you for the supercharger so ill help you out on a lot of your project. MAF, throttle body, colder spark plugs, ect. Its collecting dust so they are yours if you want them buddy.
Chris! You're a genius. I didn't even think about a body lift to help clear the supercharger...

edit: I expect a high five now when my trucks done.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 11-28-2009
Rapala's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 826
no need a body lift if you are using the M90 and worried about clearance issues, there is enough room between the stock hood the top of the charger... In the very near future Im doing a procharger setup Ive been getting parts ordered and sitting in my room as I type this... so if clearance is an issue Id go with a procharger/ vortech if you are too worried about clearace.... I wouldnt try the STS system... granted they work and perform great but I dont like the placement of the parts and thats a whole nother bag of ceral
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 11-28-2009
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: unknown
Posts: 890
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rapala View Post
no need a body lift if you are using the M90 and worried about clearance issues, there is enough room between the stock hood the top of the charger... In the very near future Im doing a procharger setup Ive been getting parts ordered and sitting in my room as I type this... so if clearance is an issue Id go with a procharger/ vortech if you are too worried about clearace.... I wouldnt try the STS system... granted they work and perform great but I dont like the placement of the parts and thats a whole nother bag of ceral
I didn't know that STS had a system for the 3.0? I was told about a year ago that I would have to have a custom built system. I did know that Whipple made a supercharger kit for the 3.0 but I thought they quit making them. Do you have any links for these options?
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 11-28-2009
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: unknown
Posts: 890
Quote:
Originally Posted by MudSlanger View Post
Ok guys, here's the deal.. These trucks only came with certain types of motors. YES they are slow. Is there ways of making them go faster, YES. Is there other options for other motors(motor swaps), YES but this is not always an option).

With that being said, these are the motors we have to deal with. Its the choices people make when trying to add performance to their motors. Intake, roller rockers, headers, exhaust, pulleys, port & polish heads, cams, stroker kits, ignition, xcal tunes, gears, ect..

Some people are limited to their performance. I dont think a lot of people want 1000horsepower vehicles but they would love a reliable motor that has enough power and has semi-decent gas mileage. Not everyone makes a lot of money and a lot of people(well most people) cant afford motor swaps or have the time for them or the know how. Their next best thing is fix up the motor they have because thats our very limited option. I mean you can swap any motor in to any vehicle with money and metal fabrication skills but lets be real here, not everyone has that skill or the money to do so. There is a 5.0 option for the ranger but that means redoing wiring and buying adapters and resizing driveshafts and other little things needed to make the swap work, like said before, not everyone has that skill or the know how. Bolt on performance parts for the 3.0 or 4.0 is options for alot of people on this site so thats what they do, its somewhat easy and affordable in most cases. If we had a wider range of options(motorwise) then i would say sell the truck and just buy a ranger already equiped with the 5.0 in it, that will solve all your problems. But we dont have the luxury. These are the cards we are dealt with and some or a lot of people on this site make the best of it.

I and a very few people on this site have the know-how or money or skills to do a 5.0 swap. I was sorta forced to do a motor swap since i blew up my 3.0. I had the money and i was lucky enough to have been doing research for a few months to do the 5.0 swap, so i went for it because it was the perfect time. If this 3.0 didnt explode, there was a great possibility that i was going to install a supercharger on the 3.0 before it died. This was the motor i was dealt with so i wanted to see the potential of this motor.

Ford installed a turd(3.0) in a ranger and i was gonna polish it but it was my decision to do so. Any motor has the potential to be a monster, its just how much money you want to spend or how many parts are built for it. Luckily there are vendors out there still producing aftermarket parts for the 3.0 guys because they know the motor is still around and im sure they know alot of guys who own them think they are slow.

To tell the truth, if i still had the 3.0 motor, you bet your *** i would have bought that supercharger manifold for the 3.0. Im an opportunist and i LOVE to prove the nah-sayers wrong. I have no hate for someone trying to build a motor. Its not my motor and i will high five anyone who tries.

Edit: LJ, let me know when you are ready for that supercharger.. if we have to, then lets go get a body lift for your truck if the superchager sits too high on top of the motor. I got lots of parts for you for the supercharger so ill help you out on a lot of your project. MAF, throttle body, colder spark plugs, ect. Its collecting dust so they are yours if you want them buddy.
Well said my friend very well said. That's what it's all about, modifying your truck with what you have and making a statement. Your Ranger says so much about who you are. The 3.0 in the ranger is not that bad with the 4.10:1 rear gears, but without them I bet it sucks. I'm on my 4th 3.0. The first one died with 79,000 miles on it. Geico sent 2 rotton,polished terds to me. The first one almost made it to the first oil change. The 2nd one lasted 2 weeks before it died and destroyed itself. Geico tried to do things on the cheap, and it bit them in the ***. Now they've put in aroud $10 to $12,000 dollars and they can't stand for me to call them with mechanical failure. They learned a valuable lesson, don't polish terds when it is useless. For what they spent overall, I could/ve done a V8 swap and then some.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 11-28-2009
MudSlanger's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,462
yea a link to the procharger would be great please, thx
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 11-28-2009
Fx4wannabe01's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (23)
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Boring, Oregon
Posts: 21,721
Great post, my twin. Geat post.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 11-28-2009
Rapala's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 826
sorry they are universal kits that you have to custom fab up. Sorry to lead you guys on with my lack of information. But from what I hear the STS system is easy to bolt up as the turbo takes place of the muffler... which is why I hate it, its out in the open exposed to the elements/ curbs/ speed bumps/ rocks/ stumps/ baby sheep
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 11-28-2009
84FordMan's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 119
Avoid STS, all of their turbo "kits" come with journal bearing turbos. Their "application listings" are just those vehicles they have had access to, to figure what exhaust pipe pieces they need. They charge a premium for common knowledge and what an exhaust shop is capable of doing.

Rapala, ever see the underneath of a Porsche 911? The ground clearance difference between the placement of the turbos on the 911 and a remote mount turbo of a Ford Ranger, lowered or not, is night and day.

Remote mount turbos are an excellent option for any application, they allow for greater range of choice, you are not restrained by packaging, plus they hide everything, for that sleeper style.

Learn how to plot a compressor map and build your own kit.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 11-28-2009
Rapala's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 826
what im saying is that I have dents on my muffler because of cheapo speed stops, even scratches from dips into driveways..... thats what Im talking about.... plus the fact that its under the truck where water can easily get into the system and screw you because they give you an open element filter and has a strong possibility of sucking in water and doing major damage. Say you are cruising along and go through a puddle since you are used to going through them without thinking.... water splashes up gets into the system and you are s.o.l. granted its a good idea but if it was in a well protected area Id go for it but with a different turbo... but Id rather go with the procharger setup as no one one that Ive seen has done one for the 3.0... and it will be all fabbed up which ive been working on for a while.

Last edited by Rapala; 11-28-2009 at 11:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Going to Summit Racing tom. need opinions! cchsbuzz19 General Ford Ranger Discussion 7 05-22-2010 01:22 PM
Tom Morana 1/8th mile comparison Rapala 2.9L & 3.0L V6 Tech 10 05-02-2010 07:10 PM
cchsbuzz19/Clayton & Toms994x4/Tom ROCKS!! Fx4wannabe01 Ranger Products, Company, & Member Reviews 15 11-02-2009 03:10 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 07:32 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.