4.0 Debate... Keep or junk...

[turbo cat]

i find nothing wrong with the 4.0. it has its poor spots but has one strong bottom end. besides going with a 302 will take you more $$$$ and more time

 

[bottledgt]

Not a carbed smogger from the early 80s...

haha, who in the hell would use those?

 

[bottledgt]

a 5.0 will make your truck a front heavy gas hog.crap if you plan on driving it every day.

BTW the roller cam conversions are junk, you should start out with a roller block if thats what you want

my truck drives just as good as it did before. and gas is about the same if not better.every pushrod 4.0 ive had has been a turd

 

[Evan]

my truck drives just as good as it did before. and gas is about the same if not better.every pushrod 4.0 ive had has been a turd

What were the problems with yours?

My 4.0 has worked great. It has well over 225,000 miles on it. I did a rebuild on the lower end a few years ago when it was hydrolocked and bent two rods. It developed a tick due to worn pushrods and rockers, and that cost me $200, a day in the garage, and a case of beer. The hydrolocking was not the engine's fault and the tick was easily fixed.

The 4.0 puts out great low-end torque in its stock form, has been reliable for me, and operates well at extreme angles and bumpy terrain. It's also a very simple engine with lots of junkyard parts available. I think calling it a total piece of crap is quite a stretch.

 

[bottledgt]

it gets around i guess. ive always had autos with them so thats probably it. ive drove a few manuals, and they seem decently peppy. still rather have a 5 liter though

 

[Evan]

it gets around i guess. ive always had autos with them so thats probably it. ive drove a few manuals, and they seem decently peppy. still rather have a 5 liter though

Your hatred for the 4.0 makes sense to me now. I can sum it up in 4 characters: A4LD. What a downright piece of crap.

You're right, the 4.0 even with a manual is a bit slow on the road. But I use mine for speeds of 5MPH or less, and often with a gear reduction of 117:1 behind it. At that reduction you're not to worried about pickup.

 

[turbo cat]

5 speed+turbo+4.0ohv= although the 302 would be probally be a blast with a turbo. ai originally wanted to do a 4.6 2v swap wit ha turbo into the x but its already setup for a forged from factory 4.0 and parts are dirt cheap

 

[rickcdewitt]

my truck drives just as good as it did before. and gas is about the same if not better.every pushrod 4.0 ive had has been a turd

i woulden't want one unless it was a 2wd hotrod or i put my truck up on one tons with huge tires,either way its no longer a work truck=worthless.

theres no way a 5.0 would get anything but horrible mileage in 4 low or at low speeds.thats the only thing i miss about my old 2.9l

 

[bottledgt]

who the **** measures mileage in 4L? if you cared, you wouldnt be in 4L anyways...lol

 

[rickcdewitt]

who the **** measures mileage in 4L? if you cared, you wouldnt be in 4L anyways...lol

there are probably quite a few people here who care if their truck will cost them 60$ for a weekend or 120$? i could gun the little 2.9l up stuff all weekend and then drive home 60 miles if i wanted

 

[Ranger44]

who the **** measures mileage in 4L? if you cared, you wouldnt be in 4L anyways...lol

Because it could mean the difference between making a trail or running out of gas. Bigger engines have to either have bigger fuel tanks or carry extra fuel for a long weekend. Not to mention, like rickcdewitt said, cost of a fun weekend.

 

[bottledgt]

yeah, he never said anything about all weekend trails away from gas stations. daily driving and off roading. everybody always changes everything on here to fit the views of this little club. 4.0 ftl

 

[Ranger44]

Truthfully I'm a bigger fan of the 2.3 and 3.0.

This is the Ranger station. The 4.0 is an "original" rbv motor. What do you expect?

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Because it could mean the difference between making a trail or running out of gas. Bigger engines have to either have bigger fuel tanks or carry extra fuel for a long weekend. Not to mention, like rickcdewitt said, cost of a fun weekend.

A small engine getting thrashed will sock down the fuel the same as a bigger one putting along.

I can't see a 302 actually getting half the milage of a 4.0 while wheeling either, with the truck doing the same thing with both engines.

With this logic, and a 5.0 only having 1 more liter than the 4.0, so does that mean the 4.0 would only get half the milage of a 3.0? Just think of the milage you could get with a 2.0 while wheeling...


Seriously I would stay with EFI because your truck is already set up for it, and it would be hard to break even powerwise against a healthy 4.0 with a carbed engine (let alone one from the 80's) Although it would at least sound decent.

Kind of funny saying that the 4.0 and 5.0 have similar power ratings... the 5.0 actually has an aftermarket...

This is the Ranger station. The 4.0 is an "original" rbv motor. What do you expect?

No it is a third (or fourth) generation Ranger engine, the 2.8 is an original (j/k) The 5.0 is an factory RBV engine as well, but is limited to Explorers.

 

[rickcdewitt]

A small engine getting thrashed will sock down the fuel the same as a bigger one .

sorry but i prove you wrong every time i go wheeling,and who said that you only putt along with a larger engine? i would only get even worse mileage over the same trails than the 4.0l,or the 2.9l.

now in your case with the p.o.s. 2.8L that gets 12 mpg i might go ahead and swap in a 302 since the mileage would be similar.