What's up everyone?!

I'm sure you've answered this question many times before in here, but I couldn't find the answer in the archives.

I'm looking to buy an 07 Ranger in the next couple days and wondering if anyone has heard/knows how much difference the 3.0 makes over stock 4 banger? I'm looking to get a 2x4 reg cab XL. The Ranger will be used more as a second vehicle, back and forth to work and the occasional weekend trips to the mountains for camping and fishing, kind of work.

Anyone out there able to give me any "real world" info on power differences and MPG?

Thanks!

 

pretty damn close from what i hear if your gonna get a 4cyl tho get a manual there way more responsive that way. and i know the 4cyl gets far better mpg somewhere around 20-25 depending on your right foot

 

IMO get the 4.0 or the 4 banger. The 3.0 just isn't a very good motor. They get bad gas mileage, have poor power, and have a remarkable tendency to break. The 4.0 gets the same gas mileage, has TONS more power, and is a very reliable engine. The 4 cyl gets GREAT mileage and has nearly the same hp as the 3.0. The 3.0 is like the worst of both worlds.

 

Heres my 2000 4cyl 5spd 0-60...........

 

sweet another jville member.

 

I like my 3.0 it does have the same horsepower but a **** load more torque than the 4cyl. iMy 3.0 has performed well but if you do get it definatly upgrade it.

 

I agree. It was pretty slow when I first bought it, but just upgrading my exhaust has already helped quite a bit. I can imagine that after adding intake, a bama tuner, pullies, etc. it shouldn't be too bad. If your that into power though, get a 4.0 from what I hear.

 

i dunno, mine seems to be pretty bulletproof
i would go 2.3 for mileage, but for camping and fishing+trails=4.0 4x4

 

Thanks for the inputs so far. Yellow Rhino, how long have you had your Ranger? Have you had any mechanical problems with the 3.0 as mentioned in an earlier reply? What kind of mods have you done? Was it that bad stock?

 

I have a 3.0 with ~80,000 miles. I have owned the truck for 2 years now, and have never had any mechanical problems with it. (Knocks on wood). I get about 17mpg, which is almost all city driving and I don't have the lightest right foot. As much as I like my 3.0 I don't think I would buy a new truck with one. It is a very old motor design and while it is very realiable, a 2.3 or a 4.0 would probalbly be a better choice.

 

I get about 22mpg, and I have kind of a heavy foot, and we have a bunch of hills........every miles I drive to get that mpg has hills, and they aint little ones either. Im not too sure about the comment about the 2.3 breaking down, my 2.5 has 140k miles on it and I haven't had a single problem with it, and as far as I know, it doesn't use any oil, and dont leak any either.

 

I'm looking at a reg cab XL and am told (by dealer) that you can't get a 4.0 in it. They say only choices are the 2.3 or 3.0. I took a 2.3 for a drive the other night and although really nice, it just didn't seem to have enough highway passing power. I'm wondering if the 3.0 is any better in that regard. hp for them both is rated almost the same (143 to 148), but the torque lists them with a noticable difference of 154 to 180.

Years ago I had an 84 4cyl Ranger and after about 4 yrs, it started running like ****. I'm sure (at least I hope) Ford has done a few engine upgrades since then, but that is still in the back of my mind.

Anyone else have 2.3 and 3.o stories to tell?

 

i wouldn't waste money on the 3.0, they drive like a tired old dog, lol. either save your money and save on the 4 cylinder (and get better mileage), or splurge and get something with the 4.0 in it...

 

What do you want to know? I've barked the tires pretty good going into second with my 4cyl. When the pavements wet, I can get the rear tires to bark (you cant hear it cause pavement is wet) going from second to third (cause the truck jerks to the side a little and you can feel them slip). I haven't been in a single situation that made me wish I had more power.

 

I have owned both the older 4 cylinder trucks, and one 3.0L. The 3.0L is less maintenance, and more torque, especially if you plan to tow a trailer. I haven't had any experience with the newer Mazda 2.3L, but would most likely choose the tried and true 3.0L. which isn't bad on gas and are a simple pushrod engine that's been around unchanged for years, and has an excelent track record. I worked in Ford dealerships for 15 years and I can't remember ever having a problem with a 3.0L in a Ranger. The 4.0L, both the older pushrod version and SOHC versions have had lots of problems. If that was the only motor available, I'd buy another vehicle. I currently have an older 2.3L truck, and have no complaints with the engine at 122K. My only 3.0L Ranger had 165K when I sold it, and it ran just as good then as when I bought it. I think the only thing I ever did to it was to replace a set of valve cover gaskets and some regular maintenance and tune-ups.
I have a buddy that has a '99 with the 3.0L with 110K on it with no complaints, and that truck doesn't get the care that any of mine ever got.
What it boils down to is that most any engine will survive and do the job if you take care of it, but the 3.0L in this case has a bit more pulling power. While neither the 2.3L or 3.0L will win any races, I would make my decision on how I was planning to use the truck. If you notice, Ford doesn't even offer a rear hitch or any towing options with the new 2.3L, so that sort of tells me something there too. As far as milage, the 3.0L would get less per gallon, but it won't be far behind the 4 cyl. This again would depend on your driving and how heavy your right foot is. The 3.0L is noticably stronger than the 2.3L, both in acceleration, pulling power and passing, which is most noticable with a loaded truck. I would also strongly recommend a manual trans, the auto trans will only take away much needed power, and the manual trans has a better reliability record.

 

Thanks for everyone's comments. Going with the 3.0.

 

Ditto on what reelfishin said; cant beat tried and true pushrod technology! I punish mine daily, it runs real good..I dont know what this "breaks real easy" is all about..Anyways I clobbered a new quad cab ram with the 4.7L V8 last night.. pretty damn bad too, by one car length, it was pathetic.. and my buds '03 XLT 2.3L/manual reg cab lost to mine as well (that was when all I had was exhaust). It's the torque that moves the truck, which the 3.0L has more of than the 2.3L.. yeah i'd recommend the manual as well, wakes up the 3.0L much more than the auto.

 

well, obviously, cause its got alittle more power.

 

i have a 2.3 extra cab manual and a single cab 3.0 auto..i love my 3.0 over my 2.3 i wasted so much gas from my 2.3 cuz the poor thing would be hard to pass up stuff and go up hills at a fast rate..like on the way to las vegas it be slugish.my 3.0 works great..i love my 3.0 =D i miss my manual thoe -_- motor mount broke on my 2.3 and the bolt wont line up -_- cuz of a acciedent i had with a BMW..woOt congrats fellow 3.0er

 

Well.. comparing a Reg cab 2.3L DOHC 143hp 5-speed to my stock extended cab 3.0L 150hp but about 30lb/ft or so more torque than the 4 banger and 5 speed.. I was expecting a little competition because of the smaller truck, but I guess all that awesome () 3.0L torque helped out

 

The 3.0 might make more torque at a lower rpm than the 4cyl on top of having 30 or so ft torque more, so that might have made the difference. idk

 

yeah i have a 2001 3.0l and i get 19 mpg cause i added a tornado fuel saver... and i have been using lucas' fuel injector cleaner for about 4 tanks.. started out at mpg so yeah i recommend both of those products. besides those 2 im completly stock and im fully impressed w/ my 3L. passing power is great ive raced a few people and beat emmost recent think 04 tundra and 00 maxima(my mom has an 03 maxima... i love its power.. deff more then my 3L, that thing is quick) the handling is great too takes right hand turns at 35 took one at 40 but i didnt wanna go higher lol

 

i have a 2006 2.3L. too me it goes fast on the highway. i usually drive about 70+ nothing but highway. have not had any problems. i have a manual transmission. i love my truck. i get 30mpg highway that is about 13 gallons. in the city i get about 24. i don't have a led foot per say. i can make my tires squel(spelling). it is good enough for me. on grave road which i drive over during the weekends i can make my tires spin. it is so fun. it is like having a 4x4 but 4x2 on grave.

 

God me too. I don't know what I was thinking by buying an auto again.