Why did you buy a 3.0? - Page 6 - 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
  #126  
Old 08-10-2008
t_schloesser's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 739
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prerunner-Ranger View Post
Didn't do my research...
x2

would love to have a 4.0 but didn't known much about rangers when i bought it. also didn't want an extended cab. and the truck had 10xxx miles when i bought it in 05
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 08-11-2008
korey89's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: South, FL
Posts: 4,672
I didn't know better and thought the 3.0 would get real good MPG for a lifted truck. Didn't know how slow it was either, but it's ok it will have a 302 eventually.
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 08-11-2008
Warren's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: georgia
Posts: 226
because i wanted an engine i could rely on, modify simply, and beat to hell. when the under-drive pulley wasn't enough, i upgraded to the supercharger. screw the 4.0.
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 08-15-2008
Npierce's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Posts: 419
I bought my 3.0 due to the price difference at the time. Hence why I own my truck now... After only having it 2 years... But also because I wasn't able to order the 4.0 motor overseas while on deployment.....
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 08-16-2008
vindex1963's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: phoenix AZ
Posts: 3,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by WowMike2001 View Post
Sounds like he has just a lemon of a truck.. Im pushing 125k on my truck right now.. never had a CEL, perfect engine.. no burps or stutters in it ever yet, maintanence is usually the best thing to keep an engine going, unless you pull out one of those vehicles that just seems to have problems left and right
His truck right now has started to leak oil. I'm sure he got a lemon, there are bad ones in every group. I do like my MPG though and he can't even come close.
Reply With Quote
  #131  
Old 08-28-2008
fordlife's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Lemoore CA/561, Fl
Posts: 773
right truck, right price, plus my driving record is long enough =p
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 08-28-2008
johnwilliams474's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Antonio, tx
Posts: 45
I love my little 3.0 damn nice truck its the smallest engine in my family's collection of vehicles witch include a 2000 Oldsmobile alero 3.5l, 2008 dodge nitro 3.7l, and a dodge 3.7l, Dakota 2004

I can't speak much about the nitro (haven't driven it)

out of all the vehicles the 3.0l beats them all plus its fun to drive

If you want to put acceleration in to the equation the car i had before the ranger was a 2.0l contour slush box im more than happy with the power output of this truck



i think the ****ty mpg is due to the areo dynamics of a brick and the gearing more than anything else

i drove a 2000 taraus (can't remember the wright spelling) 2 years and got a average mpg of 30-35 thats with a heavy foot and the same engine auto
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 08-31-2008
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: unknown
Posts: 890
I got my for a steal, $13,000 with no trade in or down payment on a brand new 2004 Ranger Edge. I have had this truck for 4 years and have had only one thing go wrong on it and that was the clutch. The 4 banger just didn't cut it for me, and the 4.0 moved the decimal point in the price tag. Plus they didn't last long either. I just wish there were more performance parts for the 3.0. I have had no problems out of the engine at all and I've got a shade under 66K miles on it. with the 4.0, right about now is where I'd start to see major problems arise. To get the 4.0 to last beyond 125,000 miles is a miracle even if you take care of it with regular sheduled maintence. For the money the ranger with a 3.0 is a more economical buy IMO.
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 09-01-2008
07Sport4x4's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Mount Vernon, WA
Posts: 83
So Nightmare, curious as to why you think a 4.0 is all done by 125K? Have you personally owned one? My good friend has a '94 with 165K on it with absolutely no problems while his wife's Toyota V6 3.0 blew head gaskets at 140K. I've owned Fords since 1983 including the 2.3 and 3.0. I don't know what you're talking about. If you've owned a 4.0 and had problems with it then I'm sorry but as I think as most would attest, the 4.0 is a good engine and will easily go 150K + with regular maintenance. And to stay on topic, the 3.0 may not get great MPG or have great HP but they sure are hard to kill.
Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 09-02-2008
Sixt9coug's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Norwalk, CA
Posts: 1,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by 07Sport4x4 View Post
So Nightmare, curious as to why you think a 4.0 is all done by 125K? Have you personally owned one? My good friend has a '94 with 165K on it with absolutely no problems while his wife's Toyota V6 3.0 blew head gaskets at 140K. I've owned Fords since 1983 including the 2.3 and 3.0. I don't know what you're talking about. If you've owned a 4.0 and had problems with it then I'm sorry but as I think as most would attest, the 4.0 is a good engine and will easily go 150K + with regular maintenance. And to stay on topic, the 3.0 may not get great MPG or have great HP but they sure are hard to kill.


I think you might be mixing up the OHV 4.0L with the newer Cologne OHC models. from what i know the OHV model isnt half bad. My neighbor has one with 240K miles on his truck. i think its a 96. Explorers got the OHC engine a while back, ive driven Explorers with the 4.0 and havent been impressed with its performance, but in sure in a Ranger with about 600 lbs less weight it would make a ton of difference. In fact, my 3.0L manual trans Ranger doesnt feel a whole lot slower than my Boss's S/C Frontier. it IS slower, but doesnt feel like that big a difference.
Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 09-02-2008
edgeofthecliff's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Safety Harbor, FL
Posts: 392
Way before the Korey days, I wanted an EDGE supercab with that fancy 4x2 prerunner look lol. All they had were 3.0's so it didn't bother me. What impressed me more is that it's got better MPG then that POS '94 Explorer I had before.
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 09-02-2008
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: unknown
Posts: 890
Quote:
Originally Posted by 07Sport4x4 View Post
So Nightmare, curious as to why you think a 4.0 is all done by 125K? Have you personally owned one? My good friend has a '94 with 165K on it with absolutely no problems while his wife's Toyota V6 3.0 blew head gaskets at 140K. I've owned Fords since 1983 including the 2.3 and 3.0. I don't know what you're talking about. If you've owned a 4.0 and had problems with it then I'm sorry but as I think as most would attest, the 4.0 is a good engine and will easily go 150K + with regular maintenance. And to stay on topic, the 3.0 may not get great MPG or have great HP but they sure are hard to kill.
The 4.0 OHV was way way better than the OHC. I've owned a total of 4 Rangers in my time. 1 4.0 OHC (the engine was done after 4 years) 1 4.0 OHV which was done in about the same amount of time. 2 3.0. The first just gave out about 2 years after I bought it (it had 85K on it when purchased, 165K went it died) and this I got brand new and have put over 66K on it and it still runs very very well.
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 09-02-2008
Fx4wannabe01's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (23)
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Boring, Oregon
Posts: 21,721
wanna take this to the 4.0L section?? i call bs on this clown.
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 09-09-2008
pacodiablo's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1,126
I don't have any real complaints about my 3.0. I have been happy with it.

My parents were the original owners of the truck. My dad wanted a 3.0 because he wanted the smallest engine he could get in an automatic Super Cab truck. At that time, the 2.3 was not available in Super Cabs, at least not in our area. At about 15,000 miles the belt tensioner was replaced under warranty for noise. No problems since. I bought it with 49,000 miles on it and have been driving it pretty hard. It now has 60,000 miles and is good as ever.

FWIW, I have driven this truck through Atlanta, New York City, Newark, DC, Baltimore, and a few other large cities, not to mention I deal with Charlotte every day. Power is not a problem in regular driving. I have more than enough power to keep up and pass people. Mine does just fine clipping along at 80 MPH. It did just fine when I did 90 MPH down a stretch of I-20. Take it out of overdrive if you have to, though I never do.

Also, I get 20-21 MPG no matter how I drive it. 19 MPG if running on E85.
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 09-09-2008
jrpro130's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,057
didn't know any better...hey korey get your 4.10's already...you'll love it! even 4.56 will be good for you!
Reply With Quote
  #141  
Old 09-09-2008
04BlackFX4's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Maine
Posts: 1,159
When i had my 94 ranger, at the time i didnt know about the 3.0's and made the mistake of getting one..now 3 years later i got a truck that has the 4.0 SOHC v6 which is just plain awesome. the 3.0's though i have to say last a long time.
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 09-09-2008
Kirk's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sherman, Texas
Posts: 18
Like someone else said, I didnt do my research, and thought I was getting a good motor.
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 09-12-2008
hickmanfab's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Stockton, CA
Posts: 17
Not to bring back a old post but, I got mine because was about 2G's less then any 4.0 around here. Plus it had lower miles, was in better shape, and thought w/ the smaller V6 i would get better mpg (lol). The funny thing was I (and shows how much research I didn't do) is I thought it was a 4 banger b/c it was so slow to my 5.9L dodge w/ 6in lift and 35's. But now i am glad i got it. I have over loaded it so many times and no problems (knock on would), pulled a 26 ft jet boat out a couple of times, a couple cords of wood, yata yata yata. Also I seen several w/ 300K on the clock and still running pretty well considering. Now i just need to mod the motor to help it out a little.

Oh it's a 04 2wd edge package.
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 11-17-2008
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: South Warren, MI
Posts: 4
I am considering buying a 1999 3.0 Ranger, 2wd automatic.

I understand this thing won't have a ton of power. I'm not looking for power. I have two Mustangs, one has 1200hp and the other 450hp. I have enough of that. I also have a hemi truck that has 340hp and gets 11-12mpg.

I'm looking at the Ranger for a beater that can get me through the winter and get decent gas milage. This one I'm looking at will also run E85, which seems to me a responsible thing to do. Do any of you guys run the flex fuel version of the 3.0? What kind of milage do you really get? Anything else I should check out on this truck I'm looking at?
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 11-17-2008
04blackedge's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (13)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 23,426
My lifted 3.0 on bigger tires get 17 city and 22 highway.
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 11-17-2008
Ranger_Guy15's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: MN
Posts: 2,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fryguy302 View Post
I am considering buying a 1999 3.0 Ranger, 2wd automatic.

I understand this thing won't have a ton of power. I'm not looking for power. I have two Mustangs, one has 1200hp and the other 450hp. I have enough of that. I also have a hemi truck that has 340hp and gets 11-12mpg.

I'm looking at the Ranger for a beater that can get me through the winter and get decent gas milage. This one I'm looking at will also run E85, which seems to me a responsible thing to do. Do any of you guys run the flex fuel version of the 3.0? What kind of milage do you really get? Anything else I should check out on this truck I'm looking at?
Running e85 I usually get 1 mpg less than I get running gas.
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 11-18-2008
SHOBout's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 234
I got the 3.0 because we had 2 taurus' 3 if you include my SHO, and the 2 taurus' had the 3.0 and we got 275kkm out of the first before rust ate it, and over 250kkm out of the newer one before I totaled it. So far its been a great truck, and I've got a best of 25MPG on the high way which isn't too bad.

But like others have said, its pretty slow compared to anything on the road, lol.

Sean
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 11-19-2008
aiezzi's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (-1)
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: oaklyn,nj
Posts: 178
the whole reason i got my 3.0 was because of gas and reliability. i have a lead foot and if i got the 4.0 i would spend damn near 300 in gas a week. but since gas has gone down i would get the 4.0 but i have no money. i have beatin the hell out of my 3.0 since i owned it and the only problem ive had is a little oil leak and my icm.
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 11-20-2008
j99ranger4x4's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Delaware, OH
Posts: 1,381
I can't belive people are getting into a heated debate over this. Bottom line is that people have their own opinions, and in the end we still all have one thing in common. We have rangers. Why do people have to sit there and bash one engine over the other? Each has its benefits and negatives. This is pretty bad considering that everyone here has a ranger, we don't have Chevy loving people on here, I mean come on?
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 11-20-2008
bwester04's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Round Rock, Tx
Posts: 2,641
Quote:
Originally Posted by j99ranger4x4 View Post
we don't have Chevy loving people on here, I mean come on?
I wouldn't bet on that LOL

Anyways, Ford has discontinued the 3.0L OHV for the 2009MY. So the debate now lies within the 2.3L Duratec and 4.0L SOHC lol jk
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
did you see what i just did there? SVT01RANGER Snapshots 17 04-30-2010 11:30 AM
Why did you buy a ranger OneTireFire General Ford Ranger Discussion 59 03-06-2010 10:44 PM
Why did you get a Ranger? Riddla General Ford Ranger Discussion 55 02-03-2010 09:09 PM
where did you buy your spindle lift from billabong98z Suspension Tech 2 04-26-2009 11:25 AM
why did you choose......... Robuilt General Ford Ranger Discussion 103 02-21-2009 06:00 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 08:32 AM.


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.