4.0 SOHC vs 3.0

[stmitch]

Area under the curve is one thing, and it's a big one, but based on peak numbers the 4.0 SOHC isn't really significantly more powerful or torquey than the 3.0 relative to it's size.
According to the Tech Library here:
The 4.0 SOHC had 207hp @ 5250rpm and 238ft-lbs @ 3000rpm. 51.75hp/L and 59.5 ft-lbs/L
A '00 3.0 OHV had 150hp @ 4750rpm and 190ft-lbs @ 3650rpm. 50hp/L and 63.3 ft-lbs/L

The 4.0 SOHC was designed in the mid 90s. The 3.0 was designed in the early 80s. 15 years of progress and a much more mechanical complexity didn't really gain as much as people might think. If anybody can find the actual torque curves for either engine that might show a bit more of a difference to justify the changes.

Seems like most of the 4.0 SOHCs went into heavy trucks with 4WD, extended cabs, etc. I'd bet that a 2wd/3.0/manual/regular cab truck could probably move just as well as the more powerful and torquey 4.0 truck with the extra 1000lbs of options they typically had to haul around.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I don't care about power, I don't care for the complexity of the 4.0. A lot of them had major problems for the first several years, after that are still hit and miss.

It is a shame, they already had a great engine designed to fit in the platform that got about the same mileage and had slightly more power and torque with 0 timing chain issues... the 5.0/4R70W.

I looked at getting a new one in the mid 00's with a 4.0. 3.0 seemed kind of dicy for a supercab 4x4. But then over here a Supercab 4x4 F-150 with the big V8 gets the same high teens...

It is a shame they didn't really get the 4.2 figured out, I think that could have been a major improvement in a Ranger too.

 

[Shran]

I owned one 3.0 truck (98 extended cab 4x4, 5 speed) and drove another one, a '93 x-cab automatic 4x4. Night and day difference... the automatic just soaked up so much power and did nothing with it. That '98 was really a pretty nice truck.

I would have no problem buying a 3.0 truck. IMO they are every bit as good as the OHV 4.0. I probably would not buy a 4.0 SOHC truck if I intended to keep it for any length of time.

 

[sgtsandman]

This all reminds me of the caliber wars on gun forums where the 9mm, .40S&W, and .45ACP crowd all keep beating their chest over who is the best when the overall numbers work out to they all equal out to about the same outcome when the numbers are crunched. Let's get out the measuring stick and see who's measures best....

 

[cbxer55]

.45ACP ftmfw. I have three 1911's, nothing else. Two Kimber's and one Colt Combat Commander. I'll never have anything else. ;-)

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

You know what a 9mm is? A 45 set on stun.

I don’t care, I want both of those.

 

[sgtsandman]

I have both 9mm and .45ACP.

As far as the engine, I have a 4.0 because that is what the truck came with.

 

[Shran]

Shut your pie holes, everyone knows 9mm is where it's at.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Shut your pie holes, everyone knows 9mm is where it's at.

I am still biding my time with my cap and ball revolvers waiting to see if this cartridge fad is going to go mainstream.

 

[Uncle Gump]

From 3.0 and 4.0 liter engines to the best hand gun caliber...

I vote for the 40 cal.... and my 22LR in a matching frame. I can carry a couple hundred rounds of 22LR in my pants pocket and I can shoot the 22LR all day for the cost of a few magazines worth of 40 cal. Keeps me in tune.

Back on subject... I still like my 4.0L SOHC... I like the way they feel and they have been good to me... despite their bad rap.