I went and test drove a 2009 XLT supercab with the 2.3 4cyl. Interested only because of mileage. How laggy the start, especially if you have to gun it after turning lol. Overall descent power in the mid range. Doesn't it still have the throttle cable setup? If so the cable mod and tune would make this little engine that could...really could :)

I'll definetly opt for the 4.0, even if it's a gas hog.

 

id take a 4 banger over my 4.0. dropping $90 a week in gas isnt as fun as it sounds.

 

I'm getting around 20mpg with my 4.0 this summer. I've gotten higher...I've gotten lower.

 

Well likewise, a thottle cable mod, airbox mod/intake, and exhaust system (high flow muffler/mandrel bends) and mostly a tune will make the 4cyl. more driveable. I could give it a second shot but we'll see.

Speaking of throttle mod, Does it still have the old cable setup or by wire?

 

cable. they are all cable.

 

^ This! My 4cyl Colorado goes twice as far on the same amount of fuel as my Ranger did!

 

If its just a commute truck with the ocassional light load I would opt for the 2.3... if its your only vehicle get the 4.0.

 

Cable ftw. Yeah I realized the Colorado 4 banger has nearly the amount of hp of a 4.0, the newer 2.9 that is. The Rado's heavier though. I'd prefer a Ranger.

 

I'm guessing the one you test drove was an ext cab? IK have an 06 mazda 2.3/auto and its perfect for a DD. I avg 25mpg driving the **** out of it. Only issue is the damn thing needs L/S. Its to torquey for the little tires lol.

 

2.3L is nice for a daily. If I bought another Ranger, it would be a 2.3L extended cab.

 

I have a 2.3 ranger and it does seem a little lazy on take off but over all it is a really nice truck and gets 30mpg on the road. but it is a auto I think if it was a stick it would have a little more guts.

 

I have a 2.3L. Avg is 33-35 mpg. 4.56 gears really help a lot.