Getting improved mileage on a 3.0 L

[Corrin Brannon]

I bought a 2000 3.0L about a year ago and it gets maybe 17 mpg on the highway and much less in town. I’ve read that they should get significantly better mileage and I assume it’s probably just the age (it has 160k miles on it) what can I do to get better mileage? I’m open to mods or maintenance of some sort

 

[97RangerXLT]

first, Welcome to TRS!

you do own a basically a brick shaped truck with the corners rounded off, so gas mileage is not going to be your strong suit. My 97 with the 4.0 gets roughly the same, I can coax 19 or 20 out of it on the highway if I am easy on the skinny pedal. 4wd will be a factor as well, and tire size and gearing will play a part. 31" and 3.73 gears for me to give you a baseline. As I understand it, the 3.0 is not much more fuel efficient than the 4.0.

Some things to do/ check: first give it a tune up. new plugs and wires, new fuel filter, new air filter. get it running good. make sure the wheels are turning freely, repack the bearings if it is a 2wd, make sure the brakes aren't dragging. check the tires, make sure they are properly inflated to the door sticker specifications. replace the shocks.

Check to see what gears you have in it, they might not be optimized for your trucks tire size. this is a fairly expensive change if you have a shop do it, especially if it is 4wd.

Other than that, if you want fuel economy, a Ranger with a v6 is not the answer...

AJ

 

[2011Supercab]

Yes to all the above.

With a manual transmission you could do a little better, the automatic shifts to soon.

The 3.0 does it's best between 2500 &3000 rpm, might need to take it out of overdrive on the highway.

It's a truck anything over 60 mph is going to suck down the gas.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

Got any check engine lights on?

 

[lil_Blue_Ford]

So… I have owned a 2000 Ranger extended cab with a 3.0 and 5-speed from new. 3.73 gears, 2wd. Once it got broken in a bit (first couple thousand miles were very inconsistent for fuel economy). Once it settled in, I got 18-20 mpg around town and 24-26 highway with a cap on the bed (aluminum with ladder racks). With a soft tonneau cover I got 20-23 around town and 28-31 highway.

Then we got the gas with ethanol…

17/18 around town and 19/20 highway with the cap, 18/19 around town and 20/21 highway with the tonneau. I chased my tail for awhile trying to improve that and couldn’t. I blame the fuel.

That said, a good tune-up is usually a good idea. I also recommend a shift kit for the automatic transmission trucks. That can be tackled with the transmission in the truck and patience is the important part along with cleanliness. There really isn’t a lot of skill involved. Put new fluid and filter in and tighten the bands while you’re there.

 

[Corrin Brannon]

Got any check engine lights on?

No sir

 

[superj]

I get 19mpg on the highway with my 5 speed and 3.0. I have about 220k miles. Thats at 80ish mph.

In town, not so good, mid teens.

My truck has the 4.1 gears in the rear though and its super duper windy in south texas so that doesnt help

 

[sgtsandman]

Aside from the above suggestions, driving style plays a big part. If you have a lead foot and like to drive fast, are heavy on the accerator when getting up to speed, and drive aggressively, you are hurting your gas mileage no matter what you drive.

Even with easy driving, anything above 55-60 miles an hour is going to hurt fuel mileage in increasing amounts due to increased drag.

The type of tires you have are going to effect mpg. An all season or highway terrain tire is going to roll easier than an all terrain tire. A mud tire is going to be even worse.

The terrain is going to play a factor as well. If you live in flat or rolling terrain, you are going to get better mileage than if you live in the Rocky Mountains or the Appalachian Mountains.

Take care of and fix what you can, maintenance and driving style are the biggest factors. Adjusting to the engine you have will help too. Even though it sounds counter intuitive, higher engine rpms can actually use less fuel than lower rpms where the engine is working harder because of less horsepower and torque output.

 

[superj]

Tires, for sure. I put heavier tires and lost like 3 or 4mpg

 

[stmitch]

17mpg is pretty normal for a 3.0:

Ford Ranger MPG - Actual MPG from 482 Ford Ranger owners

The most accurate Ford Ranger MPG estimates based on real world results of 6.8 million miles driven in 482 Ford Rangers

www.fuelly.com

Regardless of the engine, a Regular cab, 2wd, manual transmission Ranger will typically have the best fuel economy since they're lighter, have less to turn, and can choose proper engine speed. Add 4wd and the fuel economy drops. Add extended cab and the fuel economy drops. Add auto trans and the fuel economy drops. If you've got an extended cab/4wd/Auto trans, it's the worst possible combo for fuel efficiency.

These are not new trucks with bodies developed in wind tunnels, or 8-10 spd transmissions that will keep the engine at the optimal rpm as much as possible. There is a limit to what can be achieved with this recipe without making really major changes to the components. That being said, it may be possible to improve things.

Mechanical options:
1) Stay on top of maintenance. Make sure alignment is good, brakes aren't dragging, all fluids are fresh/good. Old, tired O2 sensors can tank fuel economy without throwing a code, so if they're old it might be time to replace.
2) Check throttle cable for slack. Do the "Throttle Cable Mod" if necessary
3) A crank underdrive pulley and an electric cooling fan conversion can typically gain 1-3mpg, and make the truck a bit more responsive at the same time.
4) Make sure appropriate gearing is selected for the task. Just be aware that selecting gearing that helps at highway speeds can hurt you in the city, or vice versa. 3.73 seems to be a decent ratio for an all-around truck in most cases.

Highway fuel economy mostly comes down to rolling resistance (tires), gearing (controls engine rpm), and aerodynamics (frontal area, and airflow over/around/through the body). As speed increases, so does resistance in all of these areas, so if you drive 70mph you're probably going to see some low efficiency numbers.

To reduce frontal area you can consider things like lowering the truck, and making sure the tires don't protrude outside of the body.
To improve rolling resistance, you can select lighter wheels and/or tires.
To improve aerodynamics, you can start with basic things like a grille block, front air dam, side skirts, or smooth bellypan. Anything that guides the air cleanly around your truck instead of through the messy mechanical stuff underneath is good here, and can often be done pretty cheaply. There were a few Ranger threads on ecomodders back in the day that might give you some inspiration.

Doing all of these things to optimize for the perfect fuel efficient Ranger would cost thousands of dollars, so it probably makes sense to pick and choose the options that fit your budget, usage, and personal style while considering the limitations of your specific truck's configuration.

 

[Curious Hound]

If I recall, I was able to squeeze out 19-20mpg on my 93 when I first bought it. 5 spd, 3.73 gears, everything stock except the stereo.

Then I put the tools to it. 35” tires ( but changed to 4.56 gears), 6” lift, all kinds of stuff that modified what little aerodynamic efficiencies it might have started out with. Now, 15-17 on good days. Its old. It’s far from being aerodynamically efficient. Best fuel mileage comes at speeds under 30mph where aerodynamic effects are negligible. But I love that little truck.

 

[JohnnyO]

As mentioned, a tune-up. Change the lube in the axle(s), trans, and t-case if 4wd. It doesn't always get thin with age, sometimes it gets thick.
With that many miles it wouldn't hurt to run a bottle of Cat-A-Clean in the gas. Auto Zone has it.
My first Ranger was a 99 4x4 with a 3.0/manual and it was pretty good on gas for a 4x4, which was its purpose. At the time I was traveling a lot, sometimes flying, and back then Budget was renting Rangers for cheap so that's what I'd get. They were all 3.0/auto and the mpg was horrible compared to my stick Ranger.
Best bang for the buck for performance and mpg is a cat-back exhaust but you've got to figure how long until you save the $600 in gas.