3.0 vs 4.0

[dead_throughour]

I was wondering what the reliability difference between the 3.0 liter and the 4.0 liter is. I have a 3.0 and want to run this truck until the earth dies but i also want some more power and i am wondering if the 3.0-4.0 swap is worth it (i daily the truck and also occasionally tow other cars) as the 3.0 can be a little lacking in some situations such as towing a 93 cherokee on a trailer up a hill on the freeway. any advice or knowledge is appreciated thank you!

 

[RobbieD]

I don't have any advice, nor much knowledge; but can offer only my "two cents" worth, with a side order of "opinion" . . .

I consider the 4.0 as a reliable engine. I have two of those, but have never owned a 3.0. I do see that people who run the 3.0 in general praise its reliability and longevity. And, in my personal opinion, the '94 models were the one of the peak years for these trucks, all the way around, but especially with the drivetrains (bear in mind, that was the final year of OBD1 / EEC-IV).

In all honesty, if I were in your situation I'd try to pick up a second truck, with a 4.0 and manual, as a second truck. As a caveat, of course I don't know how that option fits your personal situation.

Swapping from the 3.0 to a 4.0 would also include the transmission, likely the PCM, and likely wiring harnesses. The right way / easy way, would be to use a donor truck. Anything after the 1994 model year swapped in will increase the complexity of the swap; 1995 went to OBD2. So, your best donor years are 1990 to 1994, with '93 and '94 being the sweet spot.

A donor truck for a swap is the way to go; so why not just get a "donor" that becomes your second truck? By the time you look at the cost and hassle of a swap, just getting a second truck looks more attractive. And if it's a daily, the down time for a swap that may go well or turn into a hassle is a big consideration. In lieu of a whole donor truck, you're buying just parts, which can become a real can of worms . . .

But that's just me. I have a mental defect, that makes me want to collect these trucks.

Like I keep telling my psychiatrist, you can't have too many Rangers . . .

 

[dead_throughour]

I like the thought of a second ranger, i dont see why not haha. I think i will just use my 3.0 as a daily and keep towing with it until it dies. if i find a good 4.0 ranger ill pick it up, and also lucky me, i got a 94 without really thinking about it so im glad you think its the best year

 

[lil_Blue_Ford]

So… I will weigh in here…

My first truck was a 2000 Ranger 2wd, 3.0, 5-speed. The blue one in my sig. I loved that truck especially once I figured out I was shifting too soon. But it didn’t like towing a whole lot because it makes peak power in higher rpm’s. It did what I needed it to for a number of years, and when it got smashed up (stupidity plus black ice plus split rail fence and telephone pole), I replaced it with my 95 F-150. Especially after the changes I’ve made to that, it tows way better than the 3.0 Ranger. But the 3.0 Ranger made a better run-around truck, nimble and quick.

I have and had a couple 4.0 Rangers. Plus a couple 2.9 powered Bronco IIs. Those motors make power lower on the rpm band, so they do pull better than the 3.0, but honestly, not enough better that I’d consider swapping from 3.0 to 4.0. 2.9 to 4.0 does make sense to me, and I did that with my Choptop. When I went to 35” tires, the 2.9 would pull wicked hard until I hit 4th, then it fell flat on its face. I didn’t want the weight of a 5.0 in that rig plus with 5.0 power, it would have ended up rubber side up by now, plus it was the easy button to go 4.0 because the 2.9 and 4.0 OHV share the same bellhousing so no need to replace transmission. 3.0 shares a bellhousing with… nothing.

A 4.0 Ranger will tow better than a 3.0, but not significantly better. A 5.0 in a Ranger will tow better than both 3.0 and 4.0, but you’re still not going to be able to do in a Ranger what a bigger truck can do. My 95 F-150 with the 300 six cylinder and ZF5 transmission will work circles around my 5.0 Ranger, but the Ranger will easily smoke the F-150 when it comes to speed. My dump truck is capable of out working everything else that I own once I get it fixed here. I like owning multiple vehicles and being able to pick the proper one for what I’m doing. I’d rather take a bigger truck for bigger work, I beat the snot out of my first Ranger because I was trying to use it like an F-250. Then I treated the F-150 like an F-450, but it took the abuse better than the Ranger because I built it to take it. I’m tired of over-working stuff. The dump truck I have is an F-350 “cab and chassis” which were the highest rated F-350s so it’s essentially a F-450 which should handle anything I need.

 

[gw33gp]

There is the 4.0 pushrod and the 4.0 SOHC engines. I have no experience with the 4.0 pushrod engine. I've had both 2.9 pushrod and the 4.0 SOHC powered Rangers. I know many people say the 2.9 has good low-end power but I did not see that. I had to drive it much like a 3.0 to get power out of it. The 2.9 tows OK once you get it rolling and not let it drop much below 3,000 rpm. The 4.0 SOHC does a much better job of towing.

The early 4.0 SOHC engines had an issue with the cam timing chain guide cassettes getting brittle and if the tensioners are not replaced periodically the cassettes tend to break. That was pretty much resolved around the 2004 model years. I did a cam timing chain system rebuild on my 02 at 250K miles and the cassettes were still intact but very brittle.

I now have 305K miles on that 02 4.0 SOHC engine and it is still running strong with no signs of being old. It has not had an easy life with towing my race car all over the country and doing off-road duties in deep wilderness. I don't hesitate to take it to red line if I feel the need to and it still does that very well. Of course, I don't do that often and don't hold it there because I don't like abusing it and don't need that very often.

 

[nhmann]

300k on my push rod 4.0. OHV as well. Original 5r55e trans as well. I also tow 5k boat with it. 3.0 seem more availability with high mileage maybe due to them not doing things like towing. I have not personally seen a lot of high mileage 4.0 push rod seems like they maybe sold more 3.0 as they are much more common vs pushrod 4.0. Pre 2000.

 

[Ranger850]

Like @RobbieD mentioned, The Ranger 3.0 v6 doesn't make low end power like most V6 trucks do. The power comes after 3k rpm. The 4.0 swap would be cheaper if you you just buy a 4.o truck and drive it, or get a F-150 for bigger jobs, like towing a 93 Cherokee.

 

[superj]

I would just buy a full size to tow eith. I have towed with my 04 ranger 3.0 and its fine but i dont try to go across the country with a super heavy load. I have just towed cars on a tow dolly, which it does fine around town in stop and go traffic.

 

[dead_throughour]

Thank you all for the advice, ive come to the conclusion that i should just buy a 4.0 ranger when i get the chance and keep both. For now my little 3.0 can tow my jeep the places it needs to go and the truck has done everything ive asked of it with glee. also i dont purchase vehicles past 1999 as a general rule because im a weirdo so no sohc 4.0s for me, just good ol pushrod reliability.

 

[ifitaintbroke]

3.0 shares a bellhousing with… nothing.

EXCEPT: the 3.8 found in Windstar vans. Yes, it's true.

 

[RobbieD]

Kind of a tough call, if considering a second vehicle for a better towing truck.

An F series in general would be better for towing, but when having multiple vehicles there's certain advantages to having same or similar models, for parts compatibility and for streamlined maintenance and repair procedures.

If staying within RBV models, besides a Ranger with a 4.0, an Explorer would also be aa acceptable same-drivetrain option. And in that case, having a pickup and an SUV platforms you would have more flexibility in choice of what you have to drive.

An auto transmission is better for towing, but unfortunately in the pre-'95 models that means the A4LD, with its well known weaknesses.

My own cut-off year is 1994, and I prefer manual transmissions for their simplicity and reliability. I like the OHV 4.0; I don't want to own the OHC version. I have trucks with the 2.3, 2.8, 2.9 and 4.0 motors, and I'd get a 3.0 example if the right deal came along.

The increasing problem is that the supply of good older model trucks is getting smaller with every passing year.

Some parts are getting hard to find, and if you're going to drive vintage trucks, you really need to be your own mechanic.

 

[lil_Blue_Ford]

Thank you all for the advice, ive come to the conclusion that i should just buy a 4.0 ranger when i get the chance and keep both. For now my little 3.0 can tow my jeep the places it needs to go and the truck has done everything ive asked of it with glee. also i dont purchase vehicles past 1999 as a general rule because im a weirdo so no sohc 4.0s for me, just good ol pushrod reliability.

2000 Ranger would be the last year Ranger with the 4.0 OHV and those had the “live” front axle with no hubs which was the strongest design of the 98-11 front axle design.

For towing purposes, I’d consider an OBS F-150, either 4.9l or 5.0l.

If you’re after parts interchange, you need to stick to something 97 and older to match what you have.

 

[lil_Blue_Ford]

EXCEPT: the 3.8 found in Windstar vans. Yes, it's true.

Fair enough, although I didn’t think about it because nobody really considers trying to swap to one of those

 

[pjtoledo]

EXCEPT: the 3.8 found in Windstar vans. Yes, it's true.

more specifically, any front wheel drive 3.8 block. that includes Taurus & Sable.
also a relatively rare Continental 4.6 V8 that used the Taurus transaxle.

 

[gw33gp]

300k on my push rod 4.0. OHV as well. Original 5r55e trans as well. I also tow 5k boat with it. 3.0 seem more availability with high mileage maybe due to them not doing things like towing. I have not personally seen a lot of high mileage 4.0 push rod seems like they maybe sold more 3.0 as they are much more common vs pushrod 4.0. Pre 2000.

I know pushrod 4.0 is typically called the 4.0 OHV as opposed to the 4.0 SOHC, but I find that misleading. The 4.0 SOHC is also an OHV engine. I think we all understand that because flat head engine manufacturing for automobiles pretty much went away in the early 50s. I still prefer to use push rod for clarity.