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

No 3.0L V6 for 2008 B-series

ZSK

New Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
151
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Jacksonville, FL
Vehicle Year
2004
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
5.4
Transmission
Automatic
:agree: The 3.0 was never an option when I or anyone else I know was looking at newer Rangers. It was either MPG with the 4cyl or more power with the 4.0. My brother has the 3.0 in his ranger and it just makes me love my truck even more. We both get the same 23 mpg highway (his is Reg Cab flareside 4x4 mine Ext cab std. side 2wd) but hook up a trailer or load the bed down and I'll get better mileage and easier towing.

The 3.0 has its following but it's a smart move for Mazda to eliminate it simply because of numbers.
 


Ozwynn

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
6,457
Reaction score
123
Points
63
Age
46
Location
Enumclaw WA
Vehicle Year
2014, 1984,1990
Make / Model
Dodge, Honda, F
Engine Size
2.4L, 1100cc, 5.0l
Transmission
Manual
My credo
If you can't go through it or around it, then go over it.
even though I would take a 3.0 over a 2.9 any day of the week and twice on sunday. I still think its a boat anchor.

Long live the mighty Four point oh liter
 

Bill

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
907
Reaction score
627
Points
93
Location
Sacramento, CA
Vehicle Year
2007
Make / Model
Ford Ranger
Engine Type
2.3 (4 Cylinder)
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Long live the mighty Four point oh liter
The 4.0L will probably live through the end of the 2008 model year. Production is scheduled to end this year. There are probably enough for the 2008 Rangers, and a few new ones for replacements. Supply of the 3.0L is probably very tight as well. I've noticed the inventory of the 2008 Rangers is mostly 2.3L and 4.0L's.

Cast iron OVH and SOHC engines will be long gone and replaced with a Duratec by 2010, according to Ford.
 

4x4RangerGuy

New Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
809
Reaction score
5
Points
0
Age
37
Location
Newton Highlands, MA
Vehicle Year
2003
Make / Model
Subaru
Engine Size
2.0
Transmission
Manual
I guess I must be nostalgic. What is it about the American public and power? My 3.0 turns my 32" A/T tires with 4.10s perfectly fine. Whatever happened to a truck being a truck and not a sport sedan? I wish they would keep the 3.0 around. Reliability matters in a truck, at least if it's being used as a truck. Though these days I will admit the role of the truck has changed unfortunately. It's now more family friendly...
 

Ranger44

New Member
Ford Technician
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
3,127
Reaction score
21
Points
0
Location
Illinois
Vehicle Year
1995
Make / Model
FORD
Engine Size
4.0 OHV
Transmission
Automatic
I agree with the above....a truck is not a sports car. Reliability .....
 

Ozwynn

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
6,457
Reaction score
123
Points
63
Age
46
Location
Enumclaw WA
Vehicle Year
2014, 1984,1990
Make / Model
Dodge, Honda, F
Engine Size
2.4L, 1100cc, 5.0l
Transmission
Manual
My credo
If you can't go through it or around it, then go over it.
I had an 88 BII that the engine and trans died in on the same trip. I swapped in a 3.0L and trans from a wrecked 93 ranger I had laying around (or else I would have swapped in a 4.0), and it was reliable, also had to pull some nasty hills (these are what killed the 2.9) to get to work. My Explorer with 31's and 3.73's went up the same hills better than the BII with 31's and 4.10's. and my Explorer was far from a sports car when I got it.

A 3.0L in a Ranger is like a 305 in a G20 van or a Suburban.
 

Simple_serf

New Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
569
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
37
Location
Sherman, NY
Transmission
Automatic
See, I was raised on the 3.0, and I personally like them. the torque difference between the Duratec and the vulcan are enough to make me choose the vulcan over the duratec...Oh, and the fact that it's made out of IRON rather than aluminum. I have engines that are over 100 years old still running that are made of iron. Most aluminum engines I have eventually melt down or can't be rebuilt.

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. Additionally, aren't the duratecs considered Non-rebuildable? Again, I don't really want antyhing to do with stuff that isn't MADE to last.

Funny... I have a 2.5 Lima in my truck, and I haul lots of crap with my truck without any problem.

Now the 3.0 has been around for awhile. To me it makes sense to keep it around as a base engine and to use it in cars...It never really was a truck engine, but nither was the Lima, or the 2.9, or the 2.8....they all like to be wound up a little. i'm just tired of good solid reliable designs being replaced with stuff that hasn't really proven itself.

I'm guessing that just about every Ford engine will be a duratec before long?
 

almostclueless

New Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
1,403
Reaction score
3
Points
0
Vehicle Year
98
Make / Model
ford
Transmission
Manual
If you guys dont care about power, go buy an suzuki samarai.



I'll be driving an 08 4.0 ranger in 18 months with a BIG s___ eating grin on my face.
 

ZMan

Forum Staff Member
Forum Moderator
MTOTM Winner
Joined
Jan 5, 2003
Messages
3,653
Reaction score
192
Points
63
Age
36
Location
Medina, Ohio
Vehicle Year
1992,1994
Make / Model
Ford Rangers
Engine Type
4.0 V6
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Total Drop
4/4, bagged
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.
ones things for sure my OHV doesn't get close to 22mpg daily like my 3.0l does, and its DEFINATLY doesn't get 25 on the highway like my 3.0l does.
 

Bill

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
907
Reaction score
627
Points
93
Location
Sacramento, CA
Vehicle Year
2007
Make / Model
Ford Ranger
Engine Type
2.3 (4 Cylinder)
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
2WD
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. Additionally, aren't the duratecs considered Non-rebuildable? Again, I don't really want antyhing to do with stuff that isn't MADE to last.
The term "Duratec" is a name for the new 4-valves/cyl DOHC aluminium block engines. There are various Duratec families. The I4 originated as a Mazda design. Ford and Mazda designed the 2.3L. I think of the V6 Duratecs has some origins coming from Porsche. The other is entirely a Ford design. They are rebuildable up to the point you run out of room to bore out the cylinder sleeve, according to factory specs. People have re-sleeved them successfully, however. In any event, if you have to bore a cylinder to the point you run out of sleeving, the engine likely has been abused.

I've had several B2200's with no problems. I've known several other people that have owned them without any issues as well. The one exception was someone that insisted the engineers at Mazda didn't know a thing about motor oil and used straight 40w instead of the 10w-30 as specified by Mazda. The end result was a noisy valvetrain for several years and finally a spun bearing when he decided he needed the additional protection from a 20w-50 racing oil. In the event you want to start listing issues, let's start talking about the various annoyances found in the Cologne V6. We can start with the plastic timing gears that fall apart without warning on the 1.8, 2.0, 2.3, 2.4, 2.6, and 2.8L versions, and valve steam seals that wore out at 60K miles. Cracked heads have been a problem on all versions. Coolant leaking into the crankcase has been a problem from time to time. The Vulcan hasn't had as many problems, but by the time the Vulcan came around we had better materials for valve stem seals and gaskets. I think there was a timing problem and a blowing head gasket problem in the Taurus for a few years. Over the years, the Lima has had a few problems. Note that these problems were the typical sort of problems in the past. Since we have better materials these days we don't see as many nuisances. What we see as problems today are production issues, such as the camshaft failure Toyota has with one of their engines.

Funny... I have a 2.5 Lima in my truck, and I haul lots of crap with my truck without any problem.
Nobody suggested you couldn't haul stuff with a Lima. It really doesn't take much to haul stuff. I know someone that hauled a 700lb tower over Altamont Pass with a 70-sh hp Mazda B2000. Acceleration was a bit troublesome, but the job was a accomplished.

Now the 3.0 has been around for awhile. To me it makes sense to keep it around as a base engine and to use it in cars...It never really was a truck engine, but nither was the Lima, or the 2.9, or the 2.8....they all like to be wound up a little.

I'm guessing that just about every Ford engine will be a duratec before long?
The Vulcan has been around since 1986. No, it doesn't make sense to keep it around when there are better performing engines that are lighter, have better fuel economy, and cleaner emissions.

The origin of an engine doesn't have a thing to do with being a car or truck engine. They have been swapped between trucks and cars for years. The only "truck" engines you will find now are engines produced for larger trucks.

i'm just tired of good solid reliable designs being replaced with stuff that hasn't really proven itself.
Reliability is not going to be an issue. Reliability really hasn't been an issue for new engines in the past either, excluding technological issues in the past such as crappy oil quality and junk gaskets that started leaking a year after you bought a vehicle
 

Sevensecondsuv

New Member
RBV's on Boost
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
1,140
Reaction score
7
Points
0
Location
Northern IL
Vehicle Year
Many
Make / Model
All Fords!
Engine Size
Many
Transmission
Manual
Man, you guys and change!

Just face it, the 3.0 and 4.0 are going to be replaced with the new cyclone 3.5/3.7. It's going to be vastly more powerful than a 4.0 and get better mileage than a 3.0 (The new 3.5 taurus is rated better MPG than the 3.0 fusion :woot: )

Why are you all assuming that the new engines are going to be junk? If you haven't noticed, Ford has been winning a lot of quality awards lately, awards they weren't winning when the 3.0 and 4.0 came out. My guess is that the 3.5 proves to be less problematic than either of the old engines.

Everyone was screaming when they started putting EFI on cars and trucks. 20 years later we have realized the amazing potential of EFI and most people like it.

The 3.0 and 4.0 have had a good long run and both are great engines. I wouldn't hesitate to drive either one. But change can be for the better. If you live your life getting pissed off every time something changes, you are going to be miserable.

FWIW, Ford has a twin turbo, direct injection 3.5/3.7 in the works. That sure would make one hell of an engine swap for a ranger :drool:
 

Bent Bolt

Active Member
Ford Technician
Solid Axle Swap
Joined
Aug 16, 2007
Messages
1,433
Reaction score
4
Points
38
Age
52
Location
Edmonton,AB
Vehicle Year
1999
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
4.0 V6
Engine Size
Supercharged 4.0 SOHC
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
Solid Axle Swap 4x4
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. .
+1

3.0L is THE most reliable engine Ford has put out for years.
 

Bent Bolt

Active Member
Ford Technician
Solid Axle Swap
Joined
Aug 16, 2007
Messages
1,433
Reaction score
4
Points
38
Age
52
Location
Edmonton,AB
Vehicle Year
1999
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
4.0 V6
Engine Size
Supercharged 4.0 SOHC
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
Solid Axle Swap 4x4
What is it about the American public and power? My 3.0 turns my 32" A/T tires with 4.10s perfectly fine. Whatever happened to a truck being a truck and not a sport sedan? ..

That is exactly what is wrong with most new trucks today. Vehicles in general would be getting better fuel economy IF the engineers would design the vehicle without the high H/P. Having lot's of H/P is nice but I'd rather have the fuel economy and downshift when I hit a big hill.
 

JohnnyO

Moderator Emeritus
Forum Staff - Retired
TRS Event Participant
Joined
Jan 6, 2002
Messages
5,728
Reaction score
1,890
Points
113
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Vehicle Year
2020
Make / Model
Ranger
Engine Type
2.3 EcoBoost
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Total Lift
1.5"
Tire Size
265/70-17
My credo
"I'm not Mr. Lebowski, YOU'RE Mr. Lebowski. I'm The Dude."
+1

3.0L is THE most reliable engine Ford has put out for years.
Look at all the clapped-out 15-20 year old Tauruses running around. Can't kill 'em.
 

Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad

Top