Looking at used Rangers

[Rangerx2]

I'm considering buying a late-model Ranger, preferably with 4x4. I know after 2000 most, if not all 4x4's were equipped with the 4.0 SOHC (a few 4x4 3.0's runnin' around but not many. I'm willing to buy something with up to 150,000 miles. My question is, how durable are the SOHC motors? I've heard of a few going bad at around 200k because of timing chain issues. And rebuilding the engine to replace all 4-5 timing chains is beyond my resources. Some brilliant Ford engineer made it an interference motor! The old pushrod 4.0 on the other hand would run da** near forever, same as the 3.0 Vulcan. I'm not looking for an exotic off-road machine with gobs of power, I just want a simple, reliable DD that's going to give me a long life without all the complication of newer vehicles. So for best reliability should I shop for an older OHV 4.0 Ranger or B4000; or can I trust the SOHC 4.0 to live a long lifespan? Thanks y'all and I appreciate any feedback.

 

[09fx4guy]

It honestly all depends on how it was treated / maintained. If somebody beat the hell out of it and didn't change the oil often, it may not last very long. But if it was well taken care of, it should last a little while. Also, consider your budget and what you want to do with it. If it is just a secondary vehicle that is used once in a while, or if you want a daily driver for a long commute.

Main question, what do you want to do with the truck?

 

[RonD]

The 4.0l SOHC was first used as optional upgrade engine in the Explorers in 1997
By 1999 there were issues showing up when long timing chain guides would break causing a rattle on startup and mid-RPM
Of course Ford blamed owners for lack of service, lol
But by 2001 Ford had acknowledged the problem and the cause was that the long change tensioners where not holding the chains tight at startup which caused the chains to bang on the guide and eventually break it
Tensioner was redesigned and made it into the 2003 4.0l SOHC which was installed in some 2003 Rangers but most 2004 and up

So the 2004 and up 4.0l SOHC had the newer tensioners from factory so are a safer bet
But 2001-2003 are fine if there is no "rattle" on startup or mid-RPM because you can change the 2 tensioners when you get it
In my opinion you should change these 2 long chain tensioners every 100k miles or so, not hard to do, only use Motorcraft tensioners for this
So if you buy a 4.0l SOHC Ranger plan on changing the tensioners as a service item unless seller has paper work that they have already been changed in the last 100k miles

Outside of this tensioner issue the 4.0l SOHC was a good reliable engine
The 4.0l OHV was as well but did have the head cracking issue, if overheated, even a bit, a head would crack

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

4.0 SOHC is a good engine for what it is. Don't expect it to have a great deal of power, though.

 

[Rangerx2]

I'm assuming most owners are not like people on this forum and would not have replaced timing chains every 100k mikes. Besides, from what I've seen on a YouTube video, this is a job that requires removal of the motor and a complete teardown. Most techs recommend replacing all timing chains at once, and a 4.0 SOHC in a 4wd application has at least 4 timing chains, including the short one going to the balance shaft. That's not a job that I have the resources to do myself.
Only Ford would take a perfectly good OHV motor and convert it to OHC in such a way that they use 4 timing chains to get the job done, with a chain on the back of the motor; and run the chains up inside the heads to make it an interference design! The 4.0 may be a good engine but they really #$%^& that one up!

 

[ireallydontcare]

From my understanding, the only real issues the ohv had were heads cracking, and that was only on the 91-92 motors from what I understand. I guess in 93 they beefed up the heads, but even the 91-92 motors weren't as bad about it as it's predecessor, the 2.9 was.

Don't quote me on any of this, it's just what I've read on various forums.

 

[racsan]

my 93 ohv lived a good long life up to when it was retired from service @ 180K. never got it hot though. Ive never drove a ohc version, on paper it makes more horsepower, but at a higher rpm. Im not sure how they compare at lower rpm’s.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

From my understanding, the only real issues the ohv had were heads cracking, and that was only on the 91-92 motors from what I understand. I guess in 93 they beefed up the heads, but even the 91-92 motors weren't as bad about it as it's predecessor, the 2.9 was.

Don't quote me on any of this, it's just what I've read on various forums.

The 2.9 isnt that bad as long as you keep them cool.

 

[G8orFord]

I'm assuming most owners are not like people on this forum and would not have replaced timing chains every 100k mikes. Besides, from what I've seen on a YouTube video, this is a job that requires removal of the motor and a complete teardown. Most techs recommend replacing all timing chains at once, and a 4.0 SOHC in a 4wd application has at least 4 timing chains, including the short one going to the balance shaft. That's not a job that I have the resources to do myself.
Only Ford would take a perfectly good OHV motor and convert it to OHC in such a way that they use 4 timing chains to get the job done, with a chain on the back of the motor; and run the chains up inside the heads to make it an interference design! The 4.0 may be a good engine but they really #$%^& that one up!

Removal of the engine, yes. Complete teardown, no. You do have to remove the valve covers, lower oil pan and front cover though. You also need a specialty timing tool set to do it properly.

 

[racsan]

... and since you have it out you might as well put main & rod bearings in it, and a oil pump. After all, by the time it needs chains its going to have wear in other places.

 

[G8orFord]

... and since you have it out

You do a complete overhaul...
Or at least I did. LOL

Just sayin' the chains don't "require" a complete teardown.

 

[ireallydontcare]

The 2.9 isnt that bad as long as you keep them cool.

Oh yes don't get me wrong it is a good motor, just don't have enough torque for my uses.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

Oh yes don't get me wrong it is a good motor, just don't have enough torque for my uses.

If the 2.9 dont have the torque then you might as well scratch the 3.0 right off your list too.

 

[ireallydontcare]

If the 2.9 dont have the torque then you might as well scratch the 3.0 right off your list too.

Yes I scratched it off too, went to a 4.0 in my bronco ii. My other one still has the 2.9, but I'd like to keep it mostly stock anyway.

 

[sgtsandman]

If you have a later model 4.0 SOHC, you shouldn’t have to change the chains at 100K if the preventative maintenance is kept up and good oil is used. After 2004, the guide issue was fixed and if you change the tensioners ever 70K, you shouldn’t have any issues.