Alright Tee Rev, I made sure not to attack you while differing with your opinion. I consider your bolds and italics somewhat pointed and insulting. And they definately are not evidence--just word enhancements.
3.08s with 26" tires is the same as 33" tires with 3.90s. 26" tires with 4.10s is 5.20 gears and yes, my stock 4.0 would destroy tires with 5.20 gears on it. The 4.0 is a good engine without doing anything to it.
Competition Cams uses a 350 chevy to designs cams and then grinds them on blanks for everything else. They didn't put a 4.0 on the dyno and make a magic cam. Ford did though. They didn't do what CC did and pull a grind out of a generic box and slap it on the blank. They had that engine on the dyno for a year trying differnet things so it would pass the EPA sniffer and mileage requirements while also keeping an eye out for competitive power figures and drivability. All engines from the factory are tunes to make low end power. That's where people drive. The VE of a factory engine is maximized where you actually use it. They do studies to see where people drive and then maximize it right there.
You have a truck you are claiming low 14s without enhancements. A stock 4.0 from 1991 was rated at 155hp, net. A 3,000# Ranger would require 275hp net to acheive that. If you are using the CC 270HR grind in that motor, and those heavy lifters aren't jumping off the lobes by 5,500rpm, you have a BMEP of 162psi. The 207hp SOHC 4.0 is at 127psi (why did they bother, they should have called you!) and I'm trying to find something close to your 4.0 and can't do it. You are competitive with the 1995 Saab 900 turbo and the 2000 Porsche 911 non-turbo is a little higher.
All from the iron headed 2-valve (smaller valves than the 2.9--you should work with that engine, probably be ruuning it at Indy) Ford 4.0--which Ford erroneously replaced with cammer heads trying to get power out of it to compete with everyone else.