3.0 vs 4.0 Which is Better?

[dmt]

I did some searching on this issue, but could not find what I was looking for. What is the difference between the 2 V6's that Ford has in the Ranger. Is the 4.0 designed for more hauling and the 3.0 for better mileage?

I'm in the market to get another one and not sure which route I should/would go. I mostly use a truck for small jobs (picking up a Christmas tree, load of mulch etc...). I figure I will go the 4 cyl route, but is there benefit to a V6 besides more power like it being a more reliable engine?

Thanks

 

[3literEarl91]

I have a 3.0 and it has never given me a bit of trouble. it has over 300000 miles and does not use oil and makes no noise other that my exhaust. I have had no exp with a 4.0 but from what i have learned here it is not a bad motor either.

 

[ZMan]

I've owned both (still have the 4.0l ranger), the 4.0l has more torque, but the 3.0l got 2-3mpg better. They both had about the same mileage (120k+) on them when I drove them, the 3.0l used a quart of oil every 1,000 miles, the 4.0l used a quart every 4-5,000 miles, but that could all be how they were maintained/driven before I had them.

What year truck do you plan on buying? Personally if I were to buy another Ranger it would be a '02+ standard cab with the 2.3 duratec and a 5-spd.

 

[rickcdewitt]

Is the 4.0 designed for more hauling and the 3.0 for better mileage?



Thanks

exactly

 

[Ranger44]

Depends on what you want in a truck. You want a workhorse you can use and abuse, or a reliable daily driver that can stil pull a little weight around? After you decide, the choice would be obvious.

4.0~ Has it's quirks. Has some head issues. The stock castings like to crack(most likely after overheating). The push rods have a wearing problem also. These issues can be solved by aftermarket cast heads and hardened push rods and rockers. Nice 10" clutch. Gets ok mileage(20mpg) and good low end torque.

3.0~Was a good/fresh design from the start. Doesn't have a too many problems. Known for lasting a long time....IF you keep it well maintained. Known for it's higher powerband. Very good cruiser. Get's about 23-24mpg.

 

[dmt]

What year truck do you plan on buying? Personally if I were to buy another Ranger it would be a '02+ standard cab with the 2.3 duratec and a 5-spd.

That would be ideal if I am able to find in the $3k and under range. I am currently looking and when I find a deal I cannot pass I plan on buying. I figured I would get the lowdown on the 3.0 and 4.0 in case one pops up.

 

[97ranger4x4]

Yeh I am very happy with my 4.0, but for being a Daily driver, it often has more power than necessary. I have towed with it a few times, but I could have avoided that had I had a smaller V6. I do like the torque of the 4.0. I ususally keep it below 2500 rpms to keep mpg reasonable. Mine will drink fuel if its above 3k. the 3.0 seems to be a rev-happy motor. Not ideal for towing, but for you, it will be more than enough. I say go with the 4cyl. The gas mileage will certainly be worth the "benefits" of the V6's!

 

[lil_Blue_Ford]

If you're buying something older than when they introduced the flex-fuel 3.0 (I think that would be pre-98), I'd probably look for a 4.0L for hauling duty. Although I have no personal experience with the 3.0's of that vintage.

For hauling, IMHO, I love my 3.0L with a 5-speed. It's pulled everything I've ever threw in the bed or hooked to it. Would be nice to have a lil more low-end grunt, but it gets by. Heck, I get 15 mpg highway towing a Bronco II behind me with it!

That's what just over a ton of 2B limestone looks like in the bed... hauled it just fine. Of course, I had to upgrade my springs to a custom leaf pack not too long after that... guess stock Ranger springs are made more for weekend warriors rather than someone to use it like a truck all the time...

 

[thegoat4]

3.0

 

[JohnnyO]

The 4 cyl is dead reliable as well. For light hauling a v6 isn't worth the gas mileage penalty.
Also the 4.0 is not real common in 2wd Rangers. It was available but you won't find many. Probably half the 4wd's you'll find will have a 4.0. A lot of 2wd's will have the 3.0, especially in Supercab models.

 

[Hawker]

I had the 3.0 supercab new in 02 until I bought the 08 with a 4.0. I think the 3.0 was a fine engine and worked well in the the truck. Had a bit of a power limited situation loaded going thru the mountains in WV, but generally always gave me 23 -25 mpg. Mine had the towing package and 4:11 rear end which kept it cranked up pretty tight at speed, but it never seemed to bother it. I never had to add a drop of oil between 5K mile changes. The 4.0 gets 21 mpg consistantly and doesn't use any oil either (I only have 12K on it now). It seems uneffected by loaded or not and I believe it can handle about anything you would throw at it. Back in 96 I had a 4 cyl 5 spd. and that was troublefree as well. So my answer is that there's no wrong choice if you find a nice truck.

 

[russjd]

3.0 vs 4.0

4.0 is the best pick...
3.0 vs 4.0 mpgs about same...
the 3.0 is ~same power as 2.3 4cyl !
so its a no-brainer

 

[ZMan]

holy necro bump.

 

[txgocartB3000]

What's 6.5 years between friends?

Ray

 

[Tazzman30]

Call me the Necromancer 9 year bump. I didn't have a Ford ranger I had a 97 Ford aerostar which if you know it is literally a ranger with a van shell on top. I had the 3.0 and that thing never gave me any issues and that includes the transmission as well. It rusted out before it stopped running. My aunt had the 2.4 cylinder she was never very good at maintaining her shit but it still made it over 350,000 miles and she owned a ranch with horses so it was not treated nicely. Never had any experience with the 4.0 but I never heard anything bad about it. Nothing really major in any ways. I do wonder what you ended up getting all those years ago.