• Welcome Visitor! Please take a few seconds and Register for our forum. Even if you don't want to post, you can still 'Like' the posts that you read.

No 3.0L V6 for 2008 B-series


Bill

Active member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
526
Reaction score
205
Points
43
Location
Sacramento, CA
Vehicle Year
2007
Make / Model
Ford Ranger
Engine Type
2.3 (4 Cylinder)
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
2WD
The article is about Mazda's future plans. No mention of discontinuing the B-series, or changing its platform. Just another mention of uncertainty.

Why is Ford keeping us in the dark?

B series: Demand for compact pickups is waning, so the Mazda version of the Ford Ranger will lose the 3.0-liter V-6 for the 2008 model year. That leaves just the 2.3-liter four-banger and the 4.0-liter V-6.

http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070821/FREE/70820007/1530/FREE
 
Last edited:


Rock Auto 5% Discount Code: 4FF3E9EEA14805 Expires: October 1st, 2020

almostclueless

New member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
1,403
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Vehicle Year
98
Make / Model
ford
Transmission
Manual
THANK GOD. No more of that boat anchor.
 

Dave R

New member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
658
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Location
In the snow belt
Vehicle Year
1953
Make / Model
Kaiser
Transmission
Manual
Too late the demise of that POS.
 

b_aldredeg

New member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
34
Location
waynesville nc
Vehicle Year
2000
Make / Model
ford
Engine Size
4.0
Transmission
Manual
about time becises you coudent give me a truck that had a 3.0 in it
 

arrabil

Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
157
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
Lexington, KY
Vehicle Year
1990
Make / Model
Ford
Transmission
Automatic
You 3.0 haters rule. I think its why mine was so cheap... lack of demand. Cause there wasn't anything wrong with it.
 

almostclueless

New member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
1,403
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Vehicle Year
98
Make / Model
ford
Transmission
Manual
You 3.0 haters rule. I think its why mine was so cheap... lack of demand. Cause there wasn't anything wrong with it.
Nothing at all....for those who want a ranger thats as much of a slug as the four cylinder models....
 

arrabil

Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
157
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
Lexington, KY
Vehicle Year
1990
Make / Model
Ford
Transmission
Automatic
With 4.10 gears and the stock tire size there was nothing sluggish about it even with an auto. And when I had a lot of weight in it for 800 miles, I wouldn't have wanted the 2.3.

If you want a barn-burner, getting a 2-ton truck is the problem, not the 3.0 engine.
 

Ranger44

New member
Ford Technician
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
3,127
Reaction score
18
Points
0
Location
Illinois
Vehicle Year
1995
Make / Model
FORD
Engine Size
4.0 OHV
Transmission
Automatic
If you have 4.10's and a 5 speed....there is nothing slow about the 3.o. or 2.3 for that fact. Then again you have to know how to drive a 5spd. Plus I'd rather have a reliable engine then power. If you want power get a v-8. My experience with ohv 4.0's were never that great.
 

LearjetMinako

New member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
2,254
Reaction score
12
Points
0
Age
35
Location
Moore, OK
Vehicle Year
1996
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
2.3L 140ci
Transmission
Manual
Can't say thats good news. It does mean that I will no longer receive an electro-shock every time I change a filter on the 3.0. But it could be the end for the Ranger, or maybe an another engine for the better.
 

ZMan

Forum Staff Member
Forum Moderator
MTOTM Winner
Joined
Jan 5, 2003
Messages
3,475
Reaction score
54
Points
48
Age
34
Location
Medina, Ohio
Vehicle Year
1992,1994
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
4.0l,3.0l (soon to be 302)
Transmission
Manual
Nothing at all....for those who want a ranger thats as much of a slug as the four cylinder models....
well compared to a Duratech ya...but go back a few years and compare it to a 2.3l lima, you'll be quite surprised.
 

LearjetMinako

New member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
2,254
Reaction score
12
Points
0
Age
35
Location
Moore, OK
Vehicle Year
1996
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
2.3L 140ci
Transmission
Manual
well compared to a Duratech ya...but go back a few years and compare it to a 2.3l lima, you'll be quite surprised.
Even then, the 3.0 was still a joke. My little old 2.3 kept pulling against the 3.0. Besides, gotta love the Lima 2.3/2.5 pride.
 

almostclueless

New member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
1,403
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Vehicle Year
98
Make / Model
ford
Transmission
Manual
Heck, I wish they offered a special edition 4.5 of some sort, as long as a 5SPD was an option with it.
 

4x4RangerGuy

New member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
809
Reaction score
5
Points
0
Age
35
Location
Newton Highlands, MA
Vehicle Year
2003
Make / Model
Subaru
Engine Size
2.0
Transmission
Manual
The 3.0 may be slow, but it's bulletproof. I have RARELY had a 3.0 equipped Ford come in for work at my shop. With Rangers, all I get are 4.0 and 4cyl trucks. I'd never trade my 3.0 for anything. It may be slow, but I drive a truck, I don't need fast. I need reliable, and nothing beats the 3.0 V6 in that dept.
 

Wicked_Sludge

New member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
6,937
Reaction score
34
Points
0
Age
34
Location
Westport, WA
Vehicle Year
1993
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
3-point-GO
Transmission
Manual
anyone that thinks the 4 bangers make the same or more power then the 3.0 doesnt know how to drive...its as simple as that.

the new trucks not having a 3.0 option wont effect me much as i probably wont own anything newer then about 96 or so anyway (at least not for a play vehicle).
 

Bill

Active member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
526
Reaction score
205
Points
43
Location
Sacramento, CA
Vehicle Year
2007
Make / Model
Ford Ranger
Engine Type
2.3 (4 Cylinder)
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
2WD
People are getting defensive over nothing.

All four of the engine families used in the Ranger have been reliable. Ford isn't discontinuing the 3.0L and the 4.0L due to quality issues. The fact of the matter is they are outdated engines. The Vulcan goes back to the mid-80's. The Cologne goes back to 1968 when it was originally a 1.8L, which came from a V4 built in the early 60's.

At this point there is no reason to keep the 3.0L around. Performance of the 2.3L is just shy of the 3.0L, without the weight of a cast iron block (I think the Duratec is 40lbs lighter than the Lima). If you want to get technical about it, the specs are on Mazda's website. 143hp vs 148hp / 153ft lbs vs 180. After driving both, the 3.0L is a little better with the air conditioner running and they are both sluggish under about 2200 rpm.

I think the big complaint about the 3.0L is the fuel economy, which is only slightly better than the 4.0L, but only has a little more power than the 2.3L. After comparing the fuel economy, most people would weight in the 1-2mpg difference with the extra power the 4.0L has, and choose the 4.0L if the feel they need the power, or choose the 2.3L if they want the fuel economy.

The replacement for both the 3.0L and the 4.0L will be the Cyclone family, which is the Duratec 35 and 37. The Duratec 37 is the one that will be going into the F150's. 3.7L and 270hp. Half of the people reading this would probably kill themselves if they had a 270hp engine in their Ranger.
 


Top