What kind of gas mileage are you getting with these 4 bangers? Do you wish you had a v6 or are you content with what you have? I'm looking at buying a ranger and am considering the options. I'd appreciate any help

 

What year bracket? 93-97 2.3L Lima, 98-00 2.5L Lima, and the 2.3L DOHC from 01-11.

The newer you get the faster it gets and the better gas mileage. (Debatable on the 2.3 Lima vs the 2.5 Lima) But for sure the DOHC is the best one ever offered.

 

I get 27 - 30 with my 2006 2.3L 5spd. I have never wished I had a V6! I tow a 1600 pound lawn mower trailer (exactly max towing capacity) without any trouble. I guess it depends on what you are planning to do with your truck and how much you drive. If you go with a V6, I'd recommend a 4.0. The 3.0s are good engines, but you don't get much more power than you would with a 2.3 and you sacrifice 6-12 mpgs.

 

Right on, the one I'm looking at is an '04. Thanks

 

I have a 2010 with the 2.3L 4-cyl and auto transmission. I do a lot of traveling between FL and the GA mountains and wanted the 4-cyl for better mileage. It is still fairly new, (2,500 miles), and I'm getting about 27+ mpg's in the highway. I do not tow anything really heavy, but have towed close to 2,000 pounds with no problems.
I like the 4-cyl and wish they would make a 4x4 with this engine. With gas prices climbing again, I'm happy with my truck.

 

The 5 speed manual will probably get you 1-2mpg over the auto in case you wanted to know. I never wished I had the V6 myself. I remember many years ago when V8 engines did have much more hp than the 2.3L Duratec. I average right at 29 mpg local country miles.

 

Agree with above. I tow a 1200 lb. boat rig long distances every week. Still get 24-25 mpg towing. I do like the 2.3 , it does everything I ask it to do. NO, it's not very fast, but I do pass up the gas stations. As mentioned above, the stick shift is worth at least 2 mpg if that makes a difference to you.

I got out of a V6 because of the crappy mileage( Frontier).

Go to Fuelly.com and pull up 4 cyl. Rangers and have a look.

 

I got the 2.5L with a 5 speed. Stock I got about 23 mpg at best. Now I get about 20 in the summer and 16 in the winter. If I got a Ranger again, I'd go V6.

 

that is what happens when you go to 31s. i bet you still have 3.73 gears? our 4cyl engines are made for economy, not for off road stuff.

 

Oh I know. I'm not complaining. I knew it would happen. I have 4.10's

 

Ah, okay. I know our lima engines don't really like the cold weather winters give us...i notice slightly lower mpgs in winter time than summer. And dang, you got lucky with the 4.10s...hardly ever see that on a 4cyl.

 

It did not come with it. I swapped in a 8.8 with l/s

 

ive got a 94 2.3 5 speed and i get 22mpg when i babyshift it. but im usually slammin gears so about 18

 

I had a 98 4x4 with the 4.0 and I liked it. Due to being a 4x4 auto its hard to compare to the other rangers I had. I had a 91 with the 4 cyl 5 speed 2 wheel drive. That one was a gutless wonder. I had a 2004 B3000 with the 3.0 5 speed 2 wheel drive. That one was good but the milage maxed out at 24 hwy.

I currently have a 2004 4cyl 5 speed 2 wheel drive and it has just as much power as my b3000 had but the MPG is way better. So no I wouldn't trade my 4cyl for either 6 cyl.

 

Lots changed since I posted this thread, I appreciate all the replies. Looks like I'm goin w/ the 3.0. Teaser pic

 

My brother-in-law had an 02 3.0 edge auto, and he said he only got 20 mpg driving it easy (of course easy to him might not be easy to the rest of us! lol). Not bad if you don't drive too much.

 

The owner chipped and tuned it and he said he was gettin 418 miles to the tank and 23 mpg on the highway

 

Is it true that they put 410s on all lima extended cabs and 373s on reg cabs? Mine has 410s and while still poochy compared to most cars, it does pretty well getting 20-21 mpg in the winter and ~24 in the summer. Personally if I can't have a V8, I'd rather just have the 4 cylinder mpg, V6 was never really a consideration for me.

 

I've never head of them putting 3.73s in standard cabs and 4.10s in regular cabs for the lima engines. It was probably an option...

4.10s are nice if you have bigger tires or do towing or city driving....gives you better lower end.

 

God, tell me about it. 31s are killing me. With 4.10s on the 31 8.8 and stock tires I was getting 28-30. Now I get 22-24.

 

I get about 20-22 mpg right now doing 60/40 highway/city driving, lately i've been doing a lot of city driving and i'm down to about 18mpg. Last summer with stock size tires and mostly highway driving i was seeing between 26-30 mpg. I have a 99 2.5l 5spd and other than having to downshift going up massive hills here in seattle (because of bigger tires, was not an issue with stock size) i'm happy and don't want the v6. 4x4 would be nice but not really needed for me.

 

As I mentioned in another thread, the only Duratec-engined Ranger currently getting 3.73 rear gears is the Regular cab manual shift. Automatics and all Super cabs get 4.10's.

My 2004 Duratec stick shift used to do my 500 miles weekly commute on a single 17 gallon tank of (crummy Illinois 10% EtOH) fuel, with a good amount of highway driving.