No 3.0L V6 for 2008 B-series

[almostclueless]

Look at all the clapped-out 15-20 year old Tauruses running around. Can't kill 'em.

Yep....the 3.0 proves an engine won't break if it makes pitiful power.


wow.

 

[JohnnyO]

True. It's a pretty low-stress engine that doesn't make enough power to hurt itself. You should see the UOA's posted at BobIsTheOilGuy.com, they're all good. It doesn't even matter much what oil you use. Someone there told me once that you could fill the crankcase with peanut butter, race the 24 Hours Of LeMans, and get a good UOA.
The wife's Taurus has a 3.0 Vulcan. Famous wife quote: "But I AM flooring it!"
For a lot of people it's a good engine. Low-maintenance, low hassle, and they don't care that it's slow. Bud of mine has a 96 Ranger with a 3.0, over 230,000 miles and never been apart.

 

[exbass94]

Aren't the duratecs mazda/mazda design engines? If so, I want nothing to do with them. I had more problems with my b2200 engine wise than I could count.

At work, I drive a Ranger with the Duratech. It has almost 195,000 miles on it and still runs like brand new. It has also been beat on hard all it's life and has been poorly maintained. It's a very peppy and fun engine. I'm sure it would be a blast if it were hooked up to a manual transmission. After driving that truck, I'm would buy a Duratech in a heartbeat if I needed a 2wd Ranger.

i'm just tired of good solid reliable designs being replaced with stuff that hasn't really proven itself.

There was a time when the Lima and the 3.0 haven't proven themselves. Every engine was a "new design" at some point and nobody knew what their long-term reliability would be until they've driven them for a few hundred thousand miles. An engine can't "prove itself" when it's brand new, it takes years for that to happen. So we'll just have to wait a while, and the Duratech will prove itself (or not) in a few years. But as I've said before, the Duratech has already proven itself to me.

 

[almostclueless]

It doesn't even matter much what oil you use. Someone there told me once that you could fill the crankcase with peanut butter, race the 24 Hours Of LeMans, and get a good UOA.

That was funny....blew snot out of my nose on that one.

 

[Wicked_Sludge]

The wife's Taurus has a 3.0 Vulcan

theres also a huge difference between a power sucking AX?? and a real five speed. even with 3.73's and 31's i can still chirp tires in second on dry pavement. not bad for an engine originally intended as an introductory class sedan motor.

and 24MPG highway out of a 4x4 truck with 150hp wont get any complaints out of me. talked to a guy just today in fact with the exact same truck as mine (flairside bed even), with a 4.0 and he was only getting 16 highway.

the 3.0 is/was a good filler between the fuel sipping but gutless 4 bangers and the powerful but thirsty 4.0.

 

[almostclueless]

the 3.0 is/was a good filler between the fuel sipping but gutless 4 bangers and the powerful but thirsty 4.0.

OK...all heckling aside that is true.

 

[Simple_serf]

Bill, what can I say, I hate aluminum engines. I get tired of dealing with melting parts, stripped parts, etc. I am not a fan of 3 and 4 valve per cylinder engines. More to go wrong.

As to the b2200....

I had valve noise, the damn thing leaked a few quarts a week, you couldn't see though the oil smoke when you started it, and the carb was screwy....nobody could get it to work right...it would always run rich, leading to stalling. This led to plug fouling every few weeks.

The rest of the truck was in pretty sad shape too.

What is amusing to me, is I don't really care about the technology anymore, I just want the damn car to go down the road. Simple is good, rebuldable and field repairable is good. I have too much other crap to do without having to deal with the truck that I am trying to do work with being broken at the same time.

 

[Bill]

Bill, what can I say, I hate aluminum engines. I get tired of dealing with melting parts, stripped parts, etc. I am not a fan of 3 and 4 valve per cylinder engines. More to go wrong.

As to the b2200....

I had valve noise, the damn thing leaked a few quarts a week, you couldn't see though the oil smoke when you started it, and the carb was screwy....nobody could get it to work right...it would always run rich, leading to stalling. This led to plug fouling every few weeks.

The rest of the truck was in pretty sad shape too.

What is amusing to me, is I don't really care about the technology anymore, I just want the damn car to go down the road. Simple is good, rebuldable and field repairable is good. I have too much other crap to do without having to deal with the truck that I am trying to do work with being broken at the same time.

Melting parts? The odds of melting something in an aluminum engine are no greater than melting pistons. It happens, but it is due to a problem that has been neglected. A fair amount of aluminium engines produced in the last ten years are also capable of cooling themselves if they start running too hot. The Duratec engines are capable of running for short distances in "limp mode" without coolant. You wanna try that with any of the cast iron engines that have been used in the Rangers?

These are DOHC engines. Simply, an additional camshaft and a set of valves. Like SOHC engines, it is very unlikely this is going to introduce the possibility of additional problems as long as the the valvetrain has adequate lubrication.

I didn't have a problem with my B2200. I really wish I kept it. I had the California version which had fuel injection, so no carburetor to deal with. And as far as I'm concerned, all carburetors suck.

 

[Ozwynn]

as far as I'm concerned, all carburetors suck.

I agree with bill

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I agree with bill

Well they do operate with a vacuum...

 

[Wicked_Sludge]

Well they do operate with a vacuum...

your right. technically, they DO suck!

 

[Ozwynn]

actually the carb is getting blown ......... its the engine that sucks.......