2.9l vs 4.0l

[BRUTUS_T_HOG]

im looking to buy a different ranger,

what i want to know is a good comparison, im looking for a distributorless fuel injected 2.9l or a 4.0l

but i want to know

1. which gets better milage, or at least, what kind of milage are people getting so i can compare

2. does the 4.0l have that much more torque than the 2.9l, i care about low end towing power


right now i drive about 80 miles total a day with the 2.3l, thats good for milage, but not good for hauling moderate loads when i want to.

so i would like the extra grunt of a v6, but if the 4.0l is superior in torque and gets about the same milage then i'll be looking for that

the year range i'm looking for is 87-92

 

[fastpakr]

No such thing as a DIS 2.9. Fuel economy is pretty close - you can get accurate, objective numbers from fueleconomy.gov. My best with a 2.9 B2 was 24mpg. With a (heavier) 4.0 Explorer Sport, my best was 22mpg. Torque difference is substantial - something like 170ft-lb's vs 220, and the 220 comes on at a lower RPM. The 4.0 is also more reliable (it's an evolution of the 2.9 with some of the problems fixed) and was available as recently as 2001, instead of 1992 for the 2.9.

None of this is to say that the 2.9 is a bad engine. I had pretty good luck with both of mine. But everything the 2.9 does, the 4.0 is a little bit better at.

 

[BRUTUS_T_HOG]

yeah i just found the tech article, i thing i've going to go with the 4.0l

there has to be a DIS 2.9l, not even from 89-91?

 

[fastpakr]

Nope, the only really major change in the 2.9's engine controls was a MAF system used on later california emissions models. Other than that, it was all TFI and the only things I can think of that changed were EGR, throttle body size, etc.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

You sure you dont mean 3.0?

later,
Dustin

 

[fastpakr]

I don't think the 3.0 went to DIS until several years later. Maybe '94ish?

 

[BRUTUS_T_HOG]

yeah im working on a 94 3.0l at work and its DIS

 

[Original_Ranger84]

Turbo 2.3? Then you could tow and get get the mileage.

 

[BRUTUS_T_HOG]

no way... a 2.3t wouldn't have low end torque

 

[fastpakr]

A 2.3 has quite a bit of low end torque. Past something like 1500rpm it's above any stock RBV engine.

 

[BRUTUS_T_HOG]

a 2.3 isn't gonna beat that 4.0

mine has always been worthless for pulling anything... its either burn the clutch or spin the tires..

lol i've pulled a fully loaded trailer out of mushy mud in 3rd gear in 2wd with my 69 f250 now THAT is low end torque

 

[fastpakr]

A turbocharged 2.3 will beat a 4.0 every day of the week. I'm not sure I'd want to load it down heavily for hours at a time just because of temperature issues, but it's got more torque than a 4.0 and a LOT more power.