The Truth Behind the 3.0L V6 - Page 3 - 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
  #51  
Old 03-26-2011
cedrik101's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: aylmer, qc ,canada
Posts: 103
Yes they are partially true, it burns consideraly more gas for not a big hp/torque increase, still as 12 hp and 25 feet of torque more then the 2.5.. but it still burn less gas then a 4.0 when run smootly, specially in the city

but the big pro with the 3.0 is that its by far the more reliable(specially after 00-010) and easy to work on, ive had a 4.0 and 3.0 and i rather like my 3.0.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 03-26-2011
cedrik101's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: aylmer, qc ,canada
Posts: 103
you must run him like hell, ive rarely heard of such thing on a recent truck.. how much mileage?
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 03-26-2011
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Dickinson
Posts: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by hurley View Post
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.
Well said... I feel the same. I have a '98 3.0 4x4 ext cab step side w/ 278,000 and 24mpg all stock. Love it. Bought it for 8 grand 10 years ago. Best $$$ I every spent. Made lots of $ with it and my baby always gets me there safe. Would like to start upgrading now that my baby has got me from blue collar to white collar! Will greatly take suggestions....
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 03-26-2011
WillInThe04Ranger's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Rocky Mount, NC
Posts: 666
The 3.0 is a solid motor (as it has been said in this thread a few times.) I mean if you're looking to haul anything more then a ford festiva on a car trailer. Im sure you would get a bigger truck anyway for the towing power. The 3.0 had been around for a while, if it werent good in some aspect it would not have lasted long.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 03-27-2011
d0sitmatr's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: SFL
Posts: 706
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillInThe04Ranger View Post
The 3.0 is a solid motor (as it has been said in this thread a few times.) I mean if you're looking to haul anything more then a ford festiva on a car trailer. Im sure you would get a bigger truck anyway for the towing power. The 3.0 had been around for a while, if it werent good in some aspect it would not have lasted long.
Ive toyed a toyo 4 runner several times on a dolly with my truck that had the 3.0L without a problem.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 03-27-2011
Jrevans2002's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago, Ill
Posts: 560
I had all city driving on my last fill up with at 19.4 mpg , the only thing different with the 2.3 I -4 verses the 3.0 V-6 is that the 2.3 idles about 700 rpm and gets maybe 4 mpg more with only 8 hp less then the 3.0 according to my 07 spec guide. I get about 30 mpg on the highway if I get a chance to go from fill up to fill up with it. It is almost 4,000 lbs and thats not light by any means. There are allot more mods for the 3.0 V-6 then there are for the 4 banger. I added a K&N air filter and a bed cover to my truck.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 03-27-2011
WillInThe04Ranger's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Rocky Mount, NC
Posts: 666
Quote:
Originally Posted by d0sitmatr View Post
Ive toyed a toyo 4 runner several times on a dolly with my truck that had the 3.0L without a problem.
Thats cool, What I was gettin at and Im sure you know it, is that the trucks not gonna haul stuff like a F150. It holds its own though. Never hauled a veicle with mine, I have pulled about 350 pounds worth of trees to the back of my fiedl with it though.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 03-27-2011
RANGER_620's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Southpittsburg,Tennessee
Posts: 410
Strong motor...but no power and not the best gas mileage haha
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 03-27-2011
WillInThe04Ranger's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Rocky Mount, NC
Posts: 666
Quote:
Originally Posted by RANGER_620 View Post
Strong motor...but no power and not the best gas mileage haha
Yeah? I have heard V6 power but V8 MPG. I get 19 MPG's right now and thats on a little higher than stock tire, K&N, and Magnaflow Muffler. I mean I could ask for better, but I like where I am at to have owned this ranger since it was new and know whats been hauled with it.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 03-28-2011
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Port Perry, ON
Posts: 6
i get about 21-22 mpg driving it everyday on the highway. So far ive had the truck for 3 weeks and compared to my f150 its night and day. I only drive my f150 on the weekends now and in one weekend i use as much gas as a whole week in the ranger. Mines only got 67,000km tho so i dont know the reliability of the motor.
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 03-28-2011
Bart68's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Kamloops B.C.
Posts: 129
This is my first 3.0, I have had a 84 2.3 ltr that got low 30's, I had a 85 2.8ltr and didn't have it long enough before a guy offered me double what I paid for it but it wasn't bad, I had a 87 with a 2.9ltr in it that got 32 on straight highway trips, an 88 2.3 ltr, a 94 4.0 ltr 5speed that wasn't bad on fuel, a 95 2.3ltr 5spd that got very good milage and pulled my 14.5 foot runabout boat with a 55hp engine with little effort and now we have the EDGE with the 3.0 automatic and I havn't pulled anything with it yet but it does have the same power as my 94 4.0 and it does get better milage than the 94 but that was a 94 and things have improved in the 8 year difference.

Besides if I want to play with power I'll pull out the old Bronco and play but man when keep your right foot down you don't want to stray far from a gas station with that old truck..
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 03-28-2011
BlackRanger04's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Louisville,KY
Posts: 1,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart68 View Post
This is my first 3.0, I have had a 84 2.3 ltr that got low 30's, I had a 85 2.8ltr and didn't have it long enough before a guy offered me double what I paid for it but it wasn't bad, I had a 87 with a 2.9ltr in it that got 32 on straight highway trips, an 88 2.3 ltr, a 94 4.0 ltr 5speed that wasn't bad on fuel, a 95 2.3ltr 5spd that got very good milage and pulled my 14.5 foot runabout boat with a 55hp engine with little effort and now we have the EDGE with the 3.0 automatic and I havn't pulled anything with it yet but it does have the same power as my 94 4.0 and it does get better milage than the 94 but that was a 94 and things have improved in the 8 year difference.

Besides if I want to play with power I'll pull out the old Bronco and play but man when keep your right foot down you don't want to stray far from a gas station with that old truck..
I had a 1994 with a 4.0 OHV and I've had a 2002 Ranger Edge with the 3.0 and 4:10 gears.
I could tell that my 1994 with the 4.0 had more low end torque and it was an extended cab Ranger.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 03-29-2011
04DSGMike's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Riverside, CA
Posts: 485
3.0 = the motor that shouldve never been made.

The 3.0 has barely more HP and TQ then the 2.3 4cyl and no where near the power of the 4.0 and gets the same mileage of the 4.0!
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 03-29-2011
d0sitmatr's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: SFL
Posts: 706
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04DSGMike View Post
3.0 = the motor that shouldve never been made.

The 3.0 has barely more HP and TQ then the 2.3 4cyl and no where near the power of the 4.0 and gets the same mileage of the 4.0!
except by all the accounts Ive read, the 3.0 will outlast the 4.0 with ease.
personally, Id rather have a truck/engine that can get me into the 300+k range than one Im going to have to rebuild/replace before I hit 200k
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 03-29-2011
rangerstepside's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: eafb, sd
Posts: 545
Quote:
Originally Posted by d0sitmatr View Post
except by all the accounts Ive read, the 3.0 will outlast the 4.0 with ease.
personally, Id rather have a truck/engine that can get me into the 300+k range than one Im going to have to rebuild/replace before I hit 200k
i agree 100 percent. i love the 3.0 and would take it over a 4.0 any day
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 03-29-2011
Masteratarms93's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Goose Creek SC
Posts: 4,685
4.0s last just as long as 3.0s

Both have issues that if you don't address them they will kill the engine (poor piston head design on 4.0 OHVs, timing chains on 01-02 4.0s, cam syncro sensors and coolant leaks on 3.0s). The only difference in life I can think of is the 4.0s (being more powerful) enjoy eating slave cylinders on the manuals, and cause more wear and tear on the automatic trannies and torque converters. But that isn't the engine, just the drive-train components. Just like any engine, follow scheduled maintenance, don't let it get low on oil, fix any leaks, and it will last forever.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 03-29-2011
BlackRanger04's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Louisville,KY
Posts: 1,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04DSGMike View Post
3.0 = the motor that shouldve never been made.

The 3.0 has barely more HP and TQ then the 2.3 4cyl and no where near the power of the 4.0 and gets the same mileage of the 4.0!
I agree with you 110% ... I couldn't have said it better myself.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 03-29-2011
THECUE's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NJ
Posts: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart68 View Post
This is my first 3.0, I have had a 84 2.3 ltr that got low 30's, I had a 85 2.8ltr and didn't have it long enough before a guy offered me double what I paid for it but it wasn't bad, I had a 87 with a 2.9ltr in it that got 32 on straight highway trips, an 88 2.3 ltr, a 94 4.0 ltr 5speed that wasn't bad on fuel, a 95 2.3ltr 5spd that got very good milage and pulled my 14.5 foot runabout boat with a 55hp engine with little effort and now we have the EDGE with the 3.0 automatic and I havn't pulled anything with it yet but it does have the same power as my 94 4.0 and it does get better milage than the 94 but that was a 94 and things have improved in the 8 year difference.

Besides if I want to play with power I'll pull out the old Bronco and play but man when keep your right foot down you don't want to stray far from a gas station with that old truck..
Raise the flag!!
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 03-29-2011
kanuck15's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 844
Idk I like my 3.0. I have no use for anything bigger than that in a little truck. If the trans wasnt on its way out id like it better but still not a bad motor. If I need power I will trade out the 3.0 ranger for either of my Powerstroke trucks. But for dicking around in town its the best. Specially cause it doesnt sound like a turd 4 cylinder
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 03-29-2011
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Bloomington, MN
Posts: 208
I love the 3.0 in my truck, 161k and runs great. A few simple mods make them very livable in the power department and help a little with fuel economy. It'll crack 22mpg on the hwy easily and 18-19 mixed driving, I've also managed 20mpg hwy once on E-85. With current gas prices, I'm happy I bought a 3.0 Ranger and not a 5.4 F-150 that I was considering when I bought this truck.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 03-30-2011
d0sitmatr's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: SFL
Posts: 706
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masteratarms93 View Post
4.0s last just as long as 3.0s

Both have issues that if you don't address them they will kill the engine (poor piston head design on 4.0 OHVs, timing chains on 01-02 4.0s, cam syncro sensors and coolant leaks on 3.0s). The only difference in life I can think of is the 4.0s (being more powerful) enjoy eating slave cylinders on the manuals, and cause more wear and tear on the automatic trannies and torque converters. But that isn't the engine, just the drive-train components. Just like any engine, follow scheduled maintenance, don't let it get low on oil, fix any leaks, and it will last forever.
not saying the 4.0 wont last as long as the 3.0, but in my reading, the 4.0 requires a lot more maintenance to keep it going than the 3.0 over the course of its lifetime. and the repairs on the 4.0 are more expensive.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 03-30-2011
Masteratarms93's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Goose Creek SC
Posts: 4,685
Very true. I guess it just depends on each truck and how it's treated.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 03-30-2011
kanuck15's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masteratarms93 View Post
Very true. I guess it just depends on each truck and how it's treated.
Thats it right there, That sums up the whole discussion. Each truck is different. No two motors run identical. No one uses their truck for the same stuff and no one drives the same. It all boils down to what ya need vs what ya want and what ya want vs what you can afford. 3.0 is a great budget v6. For someone who might need to move something but doesnt wanna deal with a 4.0 every day
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 03-31-2011
Jrevans2002's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago, Ill
Posts: 560
I had another 19.45 mpg's on my 2.3, I'll try 5 psi more in the tires. I got everything I don't need out of it. Time for an oil change too.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 03-31-2011
cedrik101's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: aylmer, qc ,canada
Posts: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04DSGMike View Post
3.0 = the motor that shouldve never been made.

The 3.0 has barely more HP and TQ then the 2.3 4cyl and no where near the power of the 4.0 and gets the same mileage of the 4.0!
lol, stop speaking of things you clearly know nothing about, the 3.0 vulcan is just outdated, it was and still is a very good engine, way better reliabilty then the 4.0....dumb comment
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 12:38 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.