just introducing myself.

I have a 2010 4.0 ranger and recently just purchased a 95 2.3 ranger.

Bought the 2.3 as my daily work truck and giving my 2010 a rest. I知 on the forum to learn from other members to help me keep my work truck running smooth and safe. I do service work and drive to approx 15 houses a day and on top of that, my commute to my service area is down the mountain 4000ft and then back up afterwards.

I got a 2.3 4 cylinder basically for better gas mileage. But for my commute up and down 4000ft, I feel I should have got the 3.0 v6. Your thoughts?

 

For commuting the 2.3 is probably better, even with the climb.
It depends how much stuff you haul around and how you drive.

95 has the Lima engine with the timing belt _ simple and reliable getting its roots from the Ford Pinto _ not a huge power house.

Toss a coin between the 2.3 and the Vulcan.

 

Well, just like the pinto had a major issue with its gas tank I feel the 95 ranger has an issue with it gas tank as well. When less than a half tank, any steep decline or applying your brakes hard kills its power. The tank is so narrow and long.

I agree with you, was just thinking the 3.0 would not work as hard on the climb and I wouldn稚 sacrifice mpg really with that engine as well.

 

to add,

The load on my truck is about 200-300 pounds.

 

The 3.0 might have a little more power, but they really like to blow head gaskets... I don't think I've ever seen a 3.0 that made it past 150,000 miles. Supposedly they are out there, and every 3.0 owner on this forum might disagree with me but I won't believe it until I see it in person.

As for the little 4 poopers, they are 400K engines if you keep up on maintainence. I am a big believer in the 4.0 engines myself, I live in Mariposa which is a very similar environment in the Cali foothills and I get nearly the same milage as my buddy has a 2.3L manual (I'm at 17 while he is at 18), the 4.0's just don't have to work as hard going up hill so that helps them compete with the i4's... now on highway 99 it's a different story, I get 19 highway while he gets 25.

Here is a great link about the Lima engines: The Ford Ranger 4-Cylinder Lima Motors - The Ranger Station

Regardless if you are driving a 2.3, 2.5, 2.9, 3.0 or 4.0 ranger... at least you aren't driving a toyota or s10! hahaha welcome to the forum!

 

Thanks for the link, I'm gonna check it out right now. Was a rough decision between the 2.3 and 3.0, but from what you and others have said, I'm happy with my decision. I was worried the 2.3 would have to work harder going up the hill and that would cause issues later on. I did buy the 2.3 before I decided to move up 5600ft and not ever having to worry about snow or ice. So now my issue is wanting a 4x4 ranger. That would mean I would either have to get rid of my Jeep Cherokee, 4.0, 2.3 or a combo of a couple of them.

The 4.0 was bought brand new, it's clean and I have maintained it very well. But the mpg was getting to me (I run a pool service/repair company) because I drive to a minimum of 15 houses a day around town. I loved the long bed for my poles, buckets, tools and various other equipment. But, I didn't have enough room in the cab. If anyone would have to get into my truck, I would have to know in advance to make room for them. So I decided to buy the 2.3 for mpg and for the extended cab and since my load is never more than 300lbs, I thought it was the move to make.

Yeah, I got 16.7 mpg on the 4.0 going up my hill and it goes up with ease.
Decisions....

 

If you want a 4x4 Ranger, my opinion, and of course this is just an opinion, is to go with a 4.0L ranger. They have a little stronger motor and because of the added power the transmission and rear axles are a bit stronger then the others as well. As I mentioned earlier, I am a big fan of the 4.0's and I have one in my 2007 with 180,000 miles of pretty high RPM's, hasn't had a single problem what so ever besides a time I forgot to tighten my oil filter and leaked oil all the way home from my company shop... stupid. Just last night I just purchased another 1998 4.0L 4x4 with 250,000 miles on it and I am confident I could drive across the state in it right now.

From 1990-2000 the 4.0L OHV engines were rock solid, my personal favorites for all the ranger based vehicles produced by Ford/Mazda. In 2001 Ford changed the top end of the 4.0L's to a SOHC (single overhead cam) and redid the timing chain set up... these engines are more powerful but somewhat unreliable, often times having timing chains that slip or break and thus lead to some serious engine problems requiring a rebuild. In 2006 Ford fixed the timing chain issue by using better components... Long story short, if you are looking into a 4.0L ranger buy one from 1990-2000 or from 2006 and up, stay away from 2001-2005.

 

You rule Weasels. Thanks for your advice. I知 currently looking right now. I decided to sell the 95 2.3 and the Cherokee for the extra cash to get the 4x4. I値l keep the 2010 4.0 so I know I have a reliable truck on hand.

Hopefully within a month I値l post a pic of the new member of the family.

 

You rule Weasels. Thanks for your advice. I知 currently looking right now. I decided to sell the 95 2.3 and the Cherokee for the extra cash to get the 4x4. I値l keep the 2010 4.0 so I know I have a reliable truck on hand.

Hopefully within a month I値l post a pic of the new member of the family.