Most reliable Ranger configuration?

[Ultraspontane]

My Chevy 4.3 is seeming a heck of a lot better after reading this thread. ?

Looks like we've narrowed it down to the 3.0 and 2.3.

 

[sgtsandman]

I have had rear disk brakes on my dd since 2003 and my Ranger since 2011. Not sure what extra maintenance is required compared to a 4 liter time bomb.

Heck, mom's '02 Explorer had both and the 4.0 blew up before they had any rear brake issues.

Part of my issues maybe exacerbated by the fact that I deploy and the truck sits for months at a time. A vehicle being driven regularly probably goes a long way toward preventing that. This coming rotor and pad change will be the second since the truck was new. Something I didn’t have to do with my drum brake equipped vehicles until they were 12 or so years old.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

My Chevy 4.3 is seeming a heck of a lot better after reading this thread. ?

Looks like we've narrowed it down to the 3.0 and 2.3.

You'll be happier with the 3.0. Its still weak compared to a 4.3 but not nearly like a 2.3 would be.

Did you consider what i said about a 4.9L F150?

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Part of my issues maybe exacerbated by the fact that I deploy and the truck sits for months at a time. A vehicle being driven regularly probably goes a long way toward preventing that. This coming rotor and pad change will be the second since the truck was new. Something I didn’t have to do with my drum brake equipped vehicles until they were 12 or so years old.

I usually get about 50k out of a set of pads and 100k out of a set of rotors.

 

[Ultraspontane]

You'll be happier with the 3.0. Its still weak compared to a 4.3 but not nearly like a 2.3 would be.

Did you consider what i said about a 4.9L F150?

Yeah, I'd love a nice OBS Ford with either a 4.9, 5.0, or 5.8. Problem is, can't find decent ones around here in my price range. They're all beat to shit and ate up with rust.

 

[Dirtman]

You'll be happier with the 3.0. Its still weak compared to a 4.3 but not nearly like a 2.3 would be.

The 2.3 dtec has more power than the 3.0...

 

[rusty ol ranger]

Yeah, I'd love a nice OBS Ford with either a 4.9, 5.0, or 5.8. Problem is, can't find decent ones around here in my price range. They're all beat to shit and ate up with rust.

Rust is a killer for sure. But keep in mind that rangers are just as, if not more prone to it. Plus the pre 97 ford fullsizes usually dont seem to catch it in cruicial areas.

The 2.3 dtec has more power than the 3.0...

Wasnt aware of that.

 

[91stranger]

3700 for an 01 seems pretty steep.... Not sure what pricing is around you but one like that should be around the 2-2500 dollar mark at best. I have the 3.0 and it is fine. Plenty of power to pull a decent sized trailer and mine has been pretty reliable lately. Main culprit on the 3.0's are the camshaft synchronizer. It's not too bad to replace. I did mine on my lunch break plus a few other odds and ends that needed touched up under the hood and the part was only around $100 or so. Gas mileage sucks on a 3.0 automatic (I get 17 on good days). Not sure about the 2.3 duratec. I had the 2.3 in a 96 and it got killer gas mileage. When that truck was my mom's she would put around and never break speed limits and she could get 500 miles on a full tank (20 gallons) which is really good for an extended cab truck. It had the 5 speed too.

 

[snoranger]

3700 for an 01 seems pretty steep.... Not sure what pricing is around you but one like that should be around the 2-2500 dollar mark at best. I have the 3.0 and it is fine. Plenty of power to pull a decent sized trailer and mine has been pretty reliable lately. Main culprit on the 3.0's are the camshaft synchronizer. It's not too bad to replace. I did mine on my lunch break plus a few other odds and ends that needed touched up under the hood and the part was only around $100 or so. Gas mileage sucks on a 3.0 automatic (I get 17 on good days). Not sure about the 2.3 duratec. I had the 2.3 in a 96 and it got killer gas mileage. When that truck was my mom's she would put around and never break speed limits and she could get 500 miles on a full tank (20 gallons) which is really good for an extended cab truck. It had the 5 speed too.

I get about 27-30 MPG in my '02 Duratec. It all depends on where I drive... I can go a full tank and never hit the freeway once.

 

[sgtsandman]

I usually get about 50k out of a set of pads and 100k out of a set of rotors.

Yeah, I’m getting no where near that, even with biannual inspections, cleaning, and lube.

 

[G8orFord]

The timing chain cassette problems with the 4.0 SOHC were starting to taper off by 03 but they're no picnic to fix if they fail. I'd rather possibly deal with the cassettes once than deal with the extra maintenance every year to keep the rear disc brakes functional. An 03 also does not have traction control, another plus. The Germans caused the timing cassette problem when they decided to convert the 4.0 ohv to sohc, they didn't want to have 2 mirror image cylinder head castings that would have allowed both chains to be in the front- or even both cams driven by a single chain. They stuck a balance shaft where the cam used to live and drove it by a chain from the crank, drove the left cam off the front of the balance shaft, drove the right cam off the rear shaft, and then added a 4th chain to drive the oil pump off the crank. Typical Rube Goldberg/German engineering-overcomplicated and unnecessary. They had finally fixed all the oil leak problems they had built into the 4.0 ohv by using cheap gaskets, I can't believe they couldn't have increased the power while staying ohv cheaper and simpler with a little more compression and a little better breathing. Cheap and simple are foreign concepts to the Germans. A perfect example of cheap and simple would be the 300 six.

A couple of corrections on that. While some (not all) 4.0 SOHC's do have a balance shaft, it is not where the camshaft would be on a 4.0 OHV. It is mounted on the bottom of the engine below the crank and is spun by a chain directly off of the crankshaft. All 4.0 SOHC's do have a jackshaft where the camshaft was on an OHV engine. The jackshaft is turned by the crank and it then turns the two cams, one from the front (driver's side), the other from the back (passenger's side). The oil pump is driven off of a dummy distributor housing that the pump shaft inserts into (this) which the jackshaft turns. It does not run off of the crankshaft.

 

[19Walt93]

I've seen many sohc's apart as a former service manager but never taken one apart myself, my point was that the engine is unnecessarily complicated, that isn't debatable, it's a fact. As I said,I would prefer to have a 4.0 sohc rather than a truck with rear disc brakes and traction control, I bought 2 new Rangers with SOHC's because the 3.0 was just too underpowered. As a rule the 3.0 never gave us much trouble, it's just doggy in hilly country. My 04 Ranger had rear drums, every spring I would remove the drums for inspection, dump out the dust and put them back on. My 11 had rear disc and every year I'd have to completely disassemble the rear brakes, scrape/grind/file the rust off the slides, and lube everything to keep them from freezing up. They didn't like road salt any better than I do. ABS is dangerous on snow covered roads, traction control is just useless.

 

[Ultraspontane]

I miss the days when I was able to get by without a truck. Good reliable cars that you can easily drive for 7 more years can be found for $3,000 pretty much everywhere. Looking for a truck that meets the same standard for $5k is like searching for a needle in a haystack for sure.

 

[Ultraspontane]

I ended up buying this. She's got some miles (170k) on her, but is in very nice shape. All optioned out, it's a cowboy Cadillac compared to the Rangers I looked at. Very luxurious for the year. 5.3l v8, push button 4x4, leather, heated seats, all that jazz. I'll probably keep the 93 c1500 for work and drive this as a personal vehicle. Wish me luck!

 

[Dirtman]

That's a funny looking ford.