2002 V6 3.0 Engine Project

[Lefty]

You never get back what you put into a car or a truck, but if you can get another ten or twenty years out of yours, then you will be much better off than if you bought something new. The price tag for those repairs and upgrades is adding up very fast, but still considerably less than buying new and losing $ on depreciation.

Some cars and trucks just aren't worth the fixing, of course. Restoration and repair can be good money after bad, In my opinion, this is not the case with a Ranger unless the frame is rusted out.

Insurance is another question. You can always get some sort of classic car insurance if you like. I would not. I would rather spend that money on larger tires, better brakes, bigger better fog lights, and stiffer sway bars: all of which will make for a safer ride.

 

[Plasso]

Put a crossover with a bung for the 2nd o2? The X or H style cross over used on hipo dual exhaust.

I'm learning. I didn't even know about X or H exhaust. Thanks for the tip. My plan will be to find a good muffler shop to run a new exhaust and help me figure out where to put the O2 sensor.

the hardest part of pulling a rust belt engine is the 4 exhaust manifold-Y pipe nuts.
the big EGR tube will be rust welded into the manifold too.
since it's a manual you don't have to worry much about the tranny wiring harness.
it's also time for the rear main seal and a clutch.
and a front timing cover gasket.

in my opinion if you can pull heads you can pull an engine.
the big secret is tricks and sneaky ways to out-wit hidden bolts.

This comment has me considering an engine replacement. I could keep driving the current engine (with bad heads) for a year or two without much concern, or until something fails with a major problem. In the meantime, I could be learning how to rebuild a less problematic 3.0 engine from a junkyard, to get it ready for a future swap some indefinite time in the future. As you point out, swapping the engine will give me a chance to check the clutch (replaced 3000 miles ago) and check the rear main seal, engine mounts, etc. It would also be good just as a learning experience.

I'm now wondering about reputable sources for 3.0 crate engines vs. checking junkyards for used engines and trying to rebuild one myself. I'm thinking it would be the best learning experience to rebuild a junkyard engine, but I've never done it before so might screw something up.

I'm guessing the 3.0 replacement is easiest. I mainly just want an engine that is reliable for 150K more miles, peppy enough that I don't have to be embarrassed accelerating, and my goal is 22 mpg on the freeway. The time it takes for me to do the project matters too. So, I think replacing the V6 with a rebuilt engine is probably the best choice for these objectives.

Still, I am researching 4.0 swaps and 302 swaps, which seem way beyond my experience level and much more time-consuming and costly. Sounds like the transmission and ECU and sensor wiring also need to be updated if I were to go that route. If a diesel swap was easy and less than $5K, that would be my easy choice. But I have little confidence that I could pull off anything but a 3.0 exchange in a reasonable amount of time.

Currently working down in the South, looking at all the Rangers for sale with rust-free frames and bodies for a fraction of the price I've already sunk into mine, and contemplating driving one home.

 

[Lefty]

And while you are at it, have a look at some of the Ford Ranger 0-60 times and 1/4 mile times taken from Car and Driver, MotorTrend and Road & Track. There are many reasons why 0-60 times and 1/4 mile times can vary including the driver, weather conditions, wear and tear, and more. By looking at 0-60 times and quarter mile times, you can get a general idea of what performance numbers are achievable within reason.

The fastest tested Ford Ranger they tested is the 2019 Ford Ranger XL STX SuperCab (6' Bed), which was able to go from 0 to 60 mph in 6 seconds. It was able to reach the 1/4 mile in 14.6 seconds at 96 , according to Car and Driver.
The slowest tested Ford Ranger is 1983 Ford Ranger XLS Regular Cab, which was able to go from 0 to 60 mph in 14.8 seconds. It was able to reach the 1/4 mile in 19.97 seconds at 66.7 , according to Car and Driver.
Out of all the Ford Ranger tests, the average 0 to 60 mph time is 8.01 seconds. The average quarter mile time for all the tests is 16.1 seconds at 86.43 mph.

Some here are quite critical about the 3.0, but it scores comparatively well. Personally, I feel that the criticism is misaligned. If you are looking for sporty acceleration, maybe the problem is not just the engine but also the truck. Larger cabs add more weight. A smaller, regular cab will score a full second faster on a 0-60. It will also handle better, and get better mileage too.

My buddy has a 2002 with a big cab and a 4.0. It does 0-60 in about 7 seconds. Mine is a 2003 with a 3.0 reg cab. Its score is roughly 8 seconds. Mine averages about 20 MPG. His averages about 14. He should be getting better but his bed is always loaded with tools and junk. Maybe he could shave down his 0-60 too if he did.

2002 Ford Ranger​

Trim

Engine

Drive Type

Transmission

0-60

1/4 Mile

MPG EPA C/H/Observed

Source

XLT SLP Thunderbolt SuperCab

4.0L V6

RWD

5A

6.5 sec

14.9 sec @ 95 mph

--/--/-- mpg

Motor Week

2001 Ford Ranger​

Trim

Engine

Drive Type

Transmission

0-60

1/4 Mile

MPG EPA C/H/Observed

Source

Edge Plus SuperCab

4.0L V6

4x4

5A

8.1 sec

16.5 sec @ 84 mph

14/18/15 mpg

Edge SuperCab

4.0L V6

4x4

5A

8.1 sec

16.3 sec @ 86 mph

14/18/-- mpg

Motor Week

1998 Ford Ranger​

Trim

Engine

Drive Type

Transmission

0-60

1/4 Mile

MPG EPA C/H/Observed

Source

Splash Stepside SuperCab

4.0L V6

RWD

5A

8.9 sec

16.8 sec @ 79.8 mph

14/18/-- mpg

XLT Stepside SuperCab

4.0L V6

4x4

5A

9.8 sec

17.3 sec @ 77.1 mph

14/18/-- mpg

XLT Stepside SuperCab

4.0L V6

4x4

5A

10 sec

17.6 sec @ 78.6 mph

14/18/-- mpg

1996 Ford Ranger​

Trim

Engine

Drive Type

Transmission

0-60

1/4 Mile

MPG EPA C/H/Observed

Source

SVT V-8 Regular Cab (prototype)

5.0L V8

RWD

5M

7.2 sec

15.1 sec @ 94.1 mph

--/--/-- mpg

1995 Ford Ranger​

Trim

Engine

Drive Type

Transmission

0-60

1/4 Mile

MPG EPA C/H/Observed

Source

Splash SuperCab

4.0L V6

4x4

4A

9.5 sec

17.6 sec @ 77 mph

15/20/15 mpg

Splash SuperCab

4.0L V6

RWD

4A

8.7 sec

16.7 sec @ 82.6 mph

15/20/-- mpg

1993 Ford Ranger​

Trim

Engine

Drive Type

Transmission

0-60

1/4 Mile

MPG EPA C/H/Observed

Source

XLT Regular Cab

4.0L V6

RWD

4A

8.4 sec

16.6 sec @ 81.4 mph

15/20/-- mpg

1983 Ford Ranger​
Trim	Engine	Drive Type	Transmission	0-60	1/4 Mile	MPG EPA C/H/Observed	Source
XLS Regular Cab	2.0L I-4	RWD	4M	14.8 sec	19.97 sec @ 66.7 mph	21/28/-- mpg

 

[Blmpkn]

I wouldn't be doing anything with that lower end honestly... unless it truly needs it..

140k is nothing for a 3.0... my best friend finally retired his '98 3.0 at 340k... and only because the trans took a crap. Thing started, idled, and revv'd as smooth as the day it left the factory.

 

[Lefty]

I wouldn't be doing anything with that lower end honestly... unless it truly needs it..

140k is nothing for a 3.0... my best friend finally retired his '98 3.0 at 340k... and only because the trans took a crap. Thing started, idled, and revv'd as smooth as the day it left the factory.

And that's another reason to keep that 3.0. It will run forever. If you're happy with the acceleration and the pulling power, just go ahead and get those head gaskets fixed.