4.0 Debate... Keep or junk...

[rickcdewitt]

everybody always changes everything on here to fit the views of this little club. 4.0 ftl

we are comparing motors,it would be misdirection for you to say the 4.0 elite(LOL) are just changing things around for the end goal of making the 4.0l look like the greatest thing since sliced bread.

it is however a much more streetable and economical engine than the small block,rangers just don't need that much engine to useful

its like i said in a previous post, if i had one ton axles i might go for it,or a 2wd that gets great mileage.

no need to get butt hurt,i'm not talking smack about your truck

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

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.

Nothing will get that great of milage if you beat on it then. And at wheeling speeds you probably won't even get milage (more like yardage) no matter what you have. A 302 could have more power, so you wouldn't have to thrash it as hard to get the same thing done.

You can keep the 4.0 to try to be different from the rest... but I have seen thousands of 4.0L trucks, but I have yet to see a V-8 Ranger in real life.

Both my parents '94 4.0 Exploder, and my former college roomate's 2000 Ranger got about 16hwy, which I never was all that impressed with... my 5.4 got 18-almost 19mpg on a fishing trip a couple weeks ago with the bed full of crap and three guys in it.

My 2.8 actually gets about 10mpg around town, I have never really had it on the highway long enough to get a very good hwy reading. It is pretty much shot though and has been on death's doorstep for quite awhile, and yes it will be replaced with a V-8.

 

[rickcdewitt]

Nothing will get that great of milage if you beat on it then. And at wheeling speeds you probably won't even get milage (more like yardage) no matter what you have.

umm actually i get about 14 average if i throw in a half tank or more of wheeling.12 if i have to push the boggers.the 2.9l added a mpg or two to these #'s when creeping(though the 4.0l has the mpg advantage on the highway)

ask loanranger if his zuki doesn't get great mpgs for the wheeling and beating he does. or anyone who has a yota.

it seems to me you don't do much back country driving or wheeling?

it may not seem so to you but i'm just trying to define what each engine is best at,not create a blanket statement of which he should use.i'm not opposed to the 5.0, i just don't need one for my application.

we still have no idea what the truck is used for so its hard to say.

 

[Hahnsb2]

haha, who in the hell would use those?

Apparently you can't read too well...

 

[Ranger44]

A 302 could have more power, so you wouldn't have to thrash it as hard to get the same thing done.

Yes you can build a 5.0 easier, but the point is that the 4.0 is a practical off-road engine with a very low and strong powerband. The 5.0 has a 3.0 like high powerband stock.....so right of idle the 4.0 could have just as much if not a little more torque. That's where it's needed for most off-roading. A 5.0 would be better suited for pre-runner or street car.

Add in the lesser fuel economy of the 5.0 and ease of swapping a Ranger engine into a Ranger, and see why most have swapped to a 4.0 or have kept it.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

umm actually i get about 14 average if i throw in a half tank or more of wheeling.12 if i have to push the boggers.the 2.9l added a mpg or two to these #'s when creeping(though the 4.0l has the mpg advantage on the highway)

ask loanranger if his zuki doesn't get great mpgs for the wheeling and beating he does. or anyone who has a yota.

it seems to me you don't do much back country driving or wheeling?

it may not seem so to you but i'm just trying to define what each engine is best at,not create a blanket statement of which he should use.i'm not opposed to the 5.0, i just don't need one for my application.

we still have no idea what the truck is used for so its hard to say.

The largest largest town within 60 miles from where I keep the truck at is 6k people so it doesn't take much to go somewhere without gravel, let alone pavement. Most of my wheeling evolves a series of semi-scenic mud roads or fields (usually with some other purpose in fields than recreational mudding though... like fencing or moving equipment). I don't know of too many wheeling styles that can be harder on fuel than chewing thru mudholes and thrust vectoring with the front wheels to stay out of the ditch.

I agree, we need more info about what he plans to do with it, but if you need both an engine and a tranny anyway...

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Yes you can build a 5.0 easier, but the point is that the 4.0 is a practical off-road engine with a very low and strong powerband. The 5.0 has a 3.0 like high powerband stock.....so right of idle the 4.0 could have just as much if not a little more torque. That's where it's needed for most off-roading. A 5.0 would be better suited for pre-runner or street car.

Add in the lesser fuel economy of the 5.0 and ease of swapping a Ranger engine into a Ranger, and see why most have swapped to a 4.0 or have kept it.

So the two have similar power bands (in stock form) off of idle, but the 302 has more yet once you rev it? Just throw a RV cam in the 302 while you have it out and competition is over..

 

[turbo cat]

just throw a 16$ turbo on the 4.0 that spools to full boost before 2K to further enhance the torque of the 4.0. and then cruising down the highway you get the fuel ecomomy of a stock 4.0 actually when i tune this truck ill probally get better when i stay out of boost

 

[Ranger44]

So the two have similar power bands (in stock form) off of idle, but the 302 has more yet once you rev it? Just throw a RV cam in the 302 while you have it out and competition is over..

Actually I'd have to correct myself. The 5.0 produces it's peak torque above what a 3.0 v6 does, 3400rpm and the 3.0 at 3,200rpm. The 4.0 produces alot lower at about 1,800rpm. I'd actually believe that the 4.0 would have better "power" off-idle.

That is my point. In order to get the 5.0 to perform at a lower rpm you'd kill upper power. Then in order to soup up a 5.0 and produce bigger numbers than stock, you move that torque to an even more useless 4,000rpm.

He'd actually be better off moding a 2.3T. It'd produce it's peak torque lower.

I really think that a 4.0 when geared properly for tire size is better.

 

[bottledgt]

i swear you guys are idiots thinking a 4.0 makes better power than a 5.0. ive had both and been through more of them then i can count. 5.0 makes great torque, so believe all the charts you want

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Actually I'd have to correct myself. The 5.0 produces it's peak torque above what a 3.0 v6 does, 3400rpm and the 3.0 at 3,200rpm. The 4.0 produces alot lower at about 1,800rpm. I'd actually believe that the 4.0 would have better "power" off-idle.

Which 5.0?

Because in 1998 (the first year for the 5.0 in the Explorer) I see the 5.0 having 215hp @ 4200 RPM with 288 lb-ft @ 3300 RPM.

Same year, same application the OHV 4.0 was pumping out 160hp @ 4200 RPM with 220 @ 3000 RPM.

For some reason Ford didn't deem the 4.0 worthy of going into AWD vehicles, which was the only home of the 5.0.

http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/S...&trimid=-1&ICID=Search_SingleAutosGeneric_CAW

 

[Will]

i swear you guys are idiots thinking a 4.0 makes better power than a 5.0. ive had both and been through more of them then i can count. 5.0 makes great torque, so believe all the charts you want

Point is, is it worth the swap. A 130hp 1979 302 or a 160hp 4.0. And the 4.0 is not a screamer. Ford limits it to 4900 rpm so it doesn't throw parts. The 4.0 is a great motor. It's big enough to make the torque you need to churn 38s.

I mean, yeah, a 5.0 has an extra 60 cubes. You have a big advantage that's hard to overcome with multi-port fuel injection and such. But is it worth the swap? No. A 4.0 is enough motor to do the big jobs. It's stupid to swap it out unless you are getting crazy. A Performer and 4bbl and those things are not getting crazy. I wouldn't even swap it for a late EFI 5.0 GT setup. Just wouldn't make my truck more capable. I can break everything I have with a 4.0.

 

[rickcdewitt]

I don't know of too many wheeling styles that can be harder on fuel than chewing thru mudholes and thrust vectoring with the front wheels to stay out of the ditch.

.

the muddy hill climbs,rocks,mudholes,and overgrown logging roads on steep mountains where its 10 miles or more back to pavement can test my fuel reserve.a lot of revving at 5 mph or slower,less than the angry little 2.9 went through but still plenty.

 

[bottledgt]

i like how when we compare them, people bring up old 79 motors,like somebody is gonna actually use one of those

 

[rickcdewitt]

If i go 302 it will be coming out of a real early 80s LTD thats carbd.

i like how when we compare them, people bring up old 79 motors,like somebody is gonna actually use one of those

ummm, can you say 140 hp? we aren't trying to pick on you bottle you're just typing yourself into a corner.