The 4.0 v6 sohc is stronger and more powerful :)

[snoranger]

why do you think your 2.9 v6 would beat a 3.0 v6.

Please don’t encourage Rusty.
Thank you.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

Please don’t encourage Rusty.
Thank you.

Why not?

 

[snoranger]

Why not?

first you start with the 3.0l, then you move on to the 4.0l vs the 2.9…. Eventually you’ll be claiming to 2.9l is stronger than the 7.3 Godzilla.

 

[Vindictus]

My first ranger was an 89 2.3L good little truck until it got T-Boned 4 years in
second was a 96 3.0l this one I must say I ran the piss out of it. 3 hours round trip bouncing off the speed limiter. didn't seem to bother it to bad. Drove it for over 10 years until it shovel something through the oil pan.
Third one 2011 4.0. This ones a keeper till it can't be kept no more. Better gas mileage than i got with 3.0l. And a lot more fun to drive

 

[Vindictus]

first you start with the 3.0l, then you move on to the 4.0l vs the 2.9…. Eventually you’ll be claiming to 2.9l is stronger than the 7.3 Godzilla.

Your asking a Ranger fanatic why his is the best and you expect a rational answer com'on

 

[don4331]

Back to OP's comment: For 99% of driving the 4.3 with 245 ft.lbs. torque feels more powerful than the 4.0's 238 ft.lbs. because unless you are driving like you stole it, you probably aren't hitting rpms where the Ford is making more power.

And I'm not including the LB4 4.3 Chev with 280hp/360ft.lb found in a certain S-10.

 

[ekrampitzjr]

In the Taurus the Vulcan 3.0 is regarded as bulletproof, though not very powerful. The DOHC 3.0 V-6 had a lot more power in that car, but had its issues. I would probably still have my old '98 Taurus wagon today if it had had the Vulcan instead of the SOHC.

The Vulcan 3.0 in the Ranger has the same strengths and issues as in the Taurus. As long as you maintain it and realize it's not a high-performance engine, you'll get many miles out of it.

 

[Gary DuBois]

Never owned a 2.8. But for all intents and purposes its basically a weaker 2.9 with a carburator.

I put over 300,000, at times very tough, miles on an 87 2.9. It never let me down, they are fun to drive, get decent mileage, and just kinda have a attitude to them...they are tempermental, quirky, but they have heart lol. Kinda like the little engine that could i guess.

Yes the 3.0 was used in the sable, and yes most guys like the 4.0 the best. The 2.9 has a much smaller, much more rabid, and loyal to the death fanbase.

Never owned a 2.8. But for all intents and purposes its basically a weaker 2.9 with a carburator.

I put over 300,000, at times very tough, miles on an 87 2.9. It never let me down, they are fun to drive, get decent mileage, and just kinda have a attitude to them...they are tempermental, quirky, but they have heart lol. Kinda like the little engine that could i guess.

Yes the 3.0 was used in the sable, and yes most guys like the 4.0 the best. The 2.9 has a much smaller, much more rabid, and loyal to the death fanbase.

Do you want to own a 2.8, how is the 2.8 weaker than the 2.9, what would be the difference between a carburated and fuel injected ranger.

Did it seem like a long time until you got to 300,000 miles, and how was it tough miles at times, thats good that the 2.9 never let you down, how are they fun to drive, what do you consider as decent mileage.

I love my 4.0 v6 sohc, how is the power of the 2.9 compared to the 4.0 v6 sohc.

 

[Gary DuBois]

Please don’t encourage Rusty.
Thank you.

I wouln't encourage rusty.
Your welcome.

 

[Gary DuBois]

Please don’t encourage Rusty.
Thank you.

I will not encourage rusty.
Your welcome.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

Do you want to own a 2.8, how is the 2.8 weaker than the 2.9, what would be the difference between a carburated and fuel injected ranger.

Did it seem like a long time until you got to 300,000 miles, and how was it tough miles at times, thats good that the 2.9 never let you down, how are they fun to drive, what do you consider as decent mileage.

I love my 4.0 v6 sohc, how is the power of the 2.9 compared to the 4.0 v6 sohc.

I have no real desire for a 2.8, but i wouldnt be opposed to one in the right truck either.

EFI uses electronics to deliver/meter fuel. A carb uses mechanical systems.

It did seem like a long time, when i bought the truck new it had 1/2 mile. I say it was hard miles because i hauled and pulled way over its ratings numerous times, hit stuff...etc etc.

 

[superj]

the first ranger i ever drove had one of those older v6s. it was around an 86 or 88 and my dad had bought it for the plumbing company. it was a solid dependable truck with the engine and the standard transmission. i would take it to go surfing on the weekends and it was a blast playing around in with all the other guys in the back and running up and down the beach.

than after that, dad went to all rangers but they were the newer 93-96 body style rangers. they were great too and are why i love rangers. i drove them all for hundreds of thousands of miles all over texas

 

[racsan]

Ive had a 4.3 in a S-blazer, not a bad gm engine, plenty of low end and could manage 23 mpg highway. Ive also had a ohv 4.0 in a 93 ranger. great engine, best milage was 19. Ive never drove/owned a ohc 4.0 but between a gm 4.3 and a ford ohv 4.0 the 4.3 I feel is the better V6.
3.0? I had one in a 93 taurus, great engine in that chassis. I breifly had a ‘97 2wd ranger with a 3.0 , not much data on it as it had a auto with no 1st gear and 3.45’s so it was quite doggy starting from a stop in 2nd gear but other than that it seemed to run ok. I think with the right gearing it wouldnt be too bad, certainly better than a lima 2.3 (which also can be helped with lower gearing) It would be neat to put a 3.0 dohc duratech from a gen 2 escape in a ranger chassis, im very impressed with that engine.

 

[Gary DuBois]

Ive had a 4.3 in a S-blazer, not a bad gm engine, plenty of low end and could manage 23 mpg highway. Ive also had a ohv 4.0 in a 93 ranger. great engine, best milage was 19. Ive never drove/owned a ohc 4.0 but between a gm 4.3 and a ford ohv 4.0 the 4.3 I feel is the better V6.
3.0? I had one in a 93 taurus, great engine in that chassis. I breifly had a ‘97 2wd ranger with a 3.0 , not much data on it as it had a auto with no 1st gear and 3.45’s so it was quite doggy starting from a stop in 2nd gear but other than that it seemed to run ok. I think with the right gearing it wouldnt be too bad, certainly better than a lima 2.3 (which also can be helped with lower gearing) It would be neat to put a 3.0 dohc duratech from a gen 2 escape in a ranger chassis, im very impressed with that engine.

why do you think the 4.3 v6 vortec is a better v6

 

[00t444e]

why do you think the 4.3 v6 vortec is a better v6

Vs the 4.0 SOHC the GM 4.3 has more displacement, more reliable since it is a push rod engine, and generally gets better fuel milage. The S10 trucks they but them in were pure junk compared to a Ranger though.