The Truth Behind the 3.0L V6 - Page 2 - Ranger-Forums - The Ultimate Ford Ranger Resource


General Ford Ranger Discussion General discussion of the Ford Ranger that does not fit in any other sub-forum.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #26  
Old 03-24-2011
rangerstepside's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: eafb, sd
Posts: 545
i <3 3.0! lol. but seriously, for the year of 1999, i think it is the best for the ranger. xlt supercab, 5-speed
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 03-24-2011
hurley's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: West Belmar NJ
Posts: 1,488
I've had two of em and i have had zero problems even over 250*** miles on the clock. They don't have the power of a v8 because it isn't one. You get the power of a 3.0 because that is what it is. You can't expect the it to out perform a bigger motor so you can't really compare it to a 4.0. It is a nice in between for gas mileage and power. Mine has done just as well off road as its big brother. It's a strong reliable engine that will earn its keep.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 03-24-2011
BlackRanger04's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Louisville,KY
Posts: 1,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper_101 View Post
No power gains, maybe a couple lb.ft @ lower RPM but nothing to shout about.

If I was going to buy a new/another Ranger, it'd be a 2.3/2.5 or 4.0. The 3.0 is a solid motor, but not very powerful or good on fuel.
X2
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 03-24-2011
Taylor's Avatar
Ive been dubbed....an old volk
iTrader: (18)
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Nashville, NC
Posts: 7,110
THREAD BUMP!!!

I honestly think that when my next ranger purchase time arrives, I will get a 4 banger. Too many ins and outs with the 3.0 that I have heard.

It will also be 2wd lol
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 03-24-2011
HeloMec's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Fayetteville, GA
Posts: 118
I had a 1987 Aerostar with a 3.0 with 130,000 miles, tranny was bad only 1st and 2nd gear (was overseas hard to get parts). Drove it for over a year like that, 65 mph on the highway engine running at 6,000 rpm every day for about a hour, it never missed a beat. If you are not towing, get the 2.3 DOHC with the 5-speed manual. Great gas, mileage very dependable. If you're going to tow get the 4.0, it has great low end grunt. I have had a Ranger with all three motors, I like the 2.3 the best.

Just a little more info. I towed a 21 ft camper I owned with a 4.0 Ranger Edge SuperCab, and 5.4 F150 XLT SuperCab, got better gas mileage & felt more confident with the Ranger.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 03-24-2011
Taylor's Avatar
Ive been dubbed....an old volk
iTrader: (18)
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Nashville, NC
Posts: 7,110
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeloMec View Post
I had a 1987 Aerostar with a 3.0 with 130,000 miles, tranny was bad only 1st and 2nd gear (was overseas hard to get parts). Drove it for over a year like that, 65 mph on the highway engine running at 6,000 rpm every day for about a hour, it never missed a beat. If you are not towing, get the 2.3 DOHC with the 5-speed manual. Great gas, mileage very dependable. If you're going to tow get the 4.0, it has great low end grunt. I have had a Ranger with all three motors, I like the 2.3 the best.

Just a little more info. I towed a 21 ft camper I owned with a 4.0 Ranger Edge SuperCab, and 5.4 F150 XLT SuperCab, got better gas mileage & felt more confident with the Ranger.
6K RPM!! lol. I bet there wasnt a spec of carbon buildup in that engine.

What year is best for the 2.3 DOHC?

I would LOVE to have a single cab with a manual tarnny.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 03-24-2011
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: atlanta, ga
Posts: 37
hate to sound negative, but maybe consider not buying another ranger. couple pennies more can get a nice fx4150
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 03-24-2011
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Dickinson
Posts: 3
I have a '98 4x4 ext cab 3.0L all stock and 278,00 and still running like new. No problems at all. Replaced battery, tune up, tires and oil changes. Sea foam in the motor with mobil 1 synthetic since 50,000. Sea foam in the vaccum line for the brake booster a few years back. Ball joints clutch and shocks a few months back. No b.s, streached 24 mpg on a road trip last month. Always 93 octane. Great truck and maintained well. Kept it stock. Vulcan 3.0 has taken me to hell and back for 10 years. Never left me on the side of the road. Sounds like some people ended up with a few lemons. Sorry to hear that. Hope to replace the motor one day with one of these ecoboost motors I keep hearing about. For a truck I bought for 8 grand cash, its been a god sent.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 03-24-2011
SouthernMudSlinger's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Demorest,Ga
Posts: 1,724
The 3.0 has more than a couple more lb. ft of torque...more like nearly 30 more...its not alot, but i like the fact that you can shift much sooner than you could with a 4cyl. I've got 4.10s and 35s and get 18-19mpg mixed. Its slow, but who cares...its a truck.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 03-24-2011
HeloMec's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Fayetteville, GA
Posts: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger117 View Post
hate to sound negative, but maybe consider not buying another ranger. couple pennies more can get a nice fx4150
That is what I traded in for the Ranger I have now, saving over $300 a month in gas & insurance, and don't regret it not for one minute.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 03-24-2011
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: atlanta, ga
Posts: 37
you traded a 05+ fx4 f150 for a ranger?
i guess it's all about personal preference though.
my ranger gets the same gas mileage as a fx4 150. but mine isn't a 4cyl
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 03-24-2011
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Taylor, Michigan
Posts: 96
I bought a used 1994 3.0 4x4 5 speed manual trans Ext Cab Ranger in 1998. Had about 60k when I bought it and had about 130k when I traded it in on a 2008 Ranger FX4 4.0 in 2008. I could get a little over 20 mpg with the 3.0, and power wise with the floor shift 5 speed was up to task, including when in 4WD. But overall, I prefer the 4.0 for the extra power. If someone is really interested in the best mileage, I'd certainly recommend the 2.3. But for overall performance I'd recommend the 4.0 and I'm not sure why anyone would prefer the 3.0.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 03-24-2011
Taylor's Avatar
Ive been dubbed....an old volk
iTrader: (18)
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Nashville, NC
Posts: 7,110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger117 View Post
hate to sound negative, but maybe consider not buying another ranger. couple pennies more can get a nice fx4150
I dont really have a need for a truck bigger than a ranger.

I plan on purchasing another for a daily driver.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 03-24-2011
kanuck15's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 844
I just got a 3.0 ranger and idk it seems to be pretty skippy for what it is, Also getting 26mpg outta it which seems high but thats hand calculated. Speedometer is dead on at 60mph as well. I like it as a DD. its nice and quiet and no one notices it
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 03-24-2011
HeloMec's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Fayetteville, GA
Posts: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger117 View Post
you traded a 05+ fx4 f150 for a ranger?
i guess it's all about personal preference though.
my ranger gets the same gas mileage as a fx4 150. but mine isn't a 4cyl
It was an 08 SuperCab with a 5.4, did not like it, way to BIG. I'm 5'6" and gettin crap in and out of the bed sucked. I'd have to get in-to-the bed to get stuff out. Plus gas mileage was bad, averaged 13 mpg (Best was 19 hwy once on a trip).
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 03-24-2011
07rangersport's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Maple Ridge CANADA
Posts: 800
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeloMec View Post
I towed a 21 ft camper I owned with a 4.0 Ranger Edge SuperCab, and 5.4 F150 XLT SuperCab, got better gas mileage & felt more confident with the Ranger.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeloMec View Post
It was an 08 SuperCab with a 5.4,
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 03-24-2011
HeloMec's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Fayetteville, GA
Posts: 118
Sorry, It's the Truth, I'm a Diehard Ford Guy, but I'm not that impressed the the F150. Got 13 mpg with the Ranger, 11 mpg with the F150 while towing the camper.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 03-24-2011
Generallee701's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Columbus, Ne
Posts: 269
ive owned my 2000 ford ranger single cab manual 3.0 2wd. for over a year now. just rolled 80k a month or 2 ago.

i had 15s and street tires on it. gas mileage was worse with them. i recently went to 16s and some a/t tires. and the rpms went down about 200 while cruzing at 65mph.

i drive 30-40 miles to see the gf 2 or 3 times a week gas mileage isn't bad i think around 20. winter its a bit lower but its fine.

towing ive done small trailer loads no problem. ive towed my fathers crewcab s10 a time or two and had no problems haulin that around.

i do notice a hill will bog it down pretty quick tho lol. its got pleanty of get up and go when you need it.

ive had no major problems but the brake system locking up. which was just a 300 fix. eh no biggie everything was due for replacement anyway.

no complaints for the 3.0 here. i like it i think its a good decent mix power/mileage.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 03-25-2011
ChristianGuy's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Hayward,CA
Posts: 78
I have a 99 3.0 auto ,3:73 gearing and 31 inch tires
I still get between 17-19 MPG
The seems pretty good too!
If I had a choice between buying a 3.0 or a 4.0 from your standpoint, I would get the 4.0
It has more power and will enable a bigger wheeled ranger to get higher MPG as well
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 03-25-2011
Sonic04Edge's Avatar
RF Veteran

iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Madison. AL
Posts: 5,715
The 3.0/4.0 in an ext cab get about the same mpgs I have both so that's how I know lol. I love the 3.0 its been around for a long time. Yes some people have had some issues with it, but that goes with any motor. Think about the old 4.0 OHC motors having head gasket issues. They we're still great motors though. 3.0 has decent enough power for a DD and okay mpg. When It was stock I could get 23hwy in it. Once the 33's went on I got about 17-18hwy and avg about 15 city. With my 4.0 I am doing about 14city on 33's. Not sure on the hwy I have taken a trip in it in a while. I wouldn't hesitate owning a 3.0. I just bought a 98 with one with 205k miles and it runs great with no leaks and it's going to be my new DD. So it all just depends what you want. I love both the 3.0 and 4.0. If you want something with power definitely go 4.0, but being that most regcabs are 3.0's it's not bad. If you want great MPG's then get a 01+ 2.3. Simple as that.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 03-25-2011
d0sitmatr's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: SFL
Posts: 706
I never regretted that my truck had the 3.0 in it for a second the 6+ yrs I owned my ranger.
when I get another one, chances are it wont, but that will do only with gas mileage and nothing else.
as for reliability, in the 6+ yrs I owned mine, the only "hiccup" I encountered was a plug wire getting rubbed through from slipping its holding bracket.
$37.0 at the mechanic.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 03-25-2011
Prerunner-Ranger's Avatar
Level I Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Lancaster, CA.
Posts: 2,280
I love my 3.0.
Get a tuner and some pulleys and its got great power!
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 03-25-2011
BlackRanger04's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Louisville,KY
Posts: 1,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by 07rangersport View Post
X2
A F-150 doesn't get better gas mileage than a Ranger. I know this from owning both.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 03-25-2011
BlackRanger04's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Louisville,KY
Posts: 1,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic04Edge View Post
The 3.0/4.0 in an ext cab get about the same mpgs I have both so that's how I know lol. I love the 3.0 its been around for a long time. Yes some people have had some issues with it, but that goes with any motor. Think about the old 4.0 OHC motors having head gasket issues. They we're still great motors though. 3.0 has decent enough power for a DD and okay mpg. When It was stock I could get 23hwy in it. Once the 33's went on I got about 17-18hwy and avg about 15 city. With my 4.0 I am doing about 14city on 33's. Not sure on the hwy I have taken a trip in it in a while. I wouldn't hesitate owning a 3.0. I just bought a 98 with one with 205k miles and it runs great with no leaks and it's going to be my new DD. So it all just depends what you want. I love both the 3.0 and 4.0. If you want something with power definitely go 4.0, but being that most regcabs are 3.0's it's not bad. If you want great MPG's then get a 01+ 2.3. Simple as that.
I'm in pretty much the same situation. I own a 3.0 and a 4.0 SOHC too.
My 3.0 will be my DD and gas saver and on the days I don't feel like bein blown away by rice burners I'll drive my Ranger with the 4.0.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 03-26-2011
Naturally Aspirated's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Roy, Utah
Posts: 484
I had a 3.0, and it had absolutely nothing wrong with it. The gas mileage was alright, but I did have 33" tires on it. It's a truck not a f'n Prius. I didn't buy it to save on gas...
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is Ford Killing the Ranger?? the truth scooter General Ford Ranger Discussion 44 10-01-2009 04:28 AM
Here you go-TRUTH about blue Ricer bulbs T4EaterJonny Exterior Semi-Tech 13 02-03-2008 03:55 PM
OK! It's time to tell the truth!!! RescueRangerFX4 General Ford Ranger Discussion 25 08-23-2005 03:35 PM


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 03:36 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.