• Welcome Visitor! Please take a few seconds and Register for our forum. Even if you don't want to post, you can still 'Like' and react to posts.

Need advice on gas mileage?


rangerhjs

Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
6
Vehicle Year
2000
Transmission
Automatic
I have a 2000 XLT Ford Ranger 3.0L extended cab 2WD with an automatic transmission. What can i put on it or do to it to help increase gas mileage? and maybe increase some horsepower?
 
Increased power is mutually exclusive of increased economy. Best advice I can give is keep it maintained, and drive it slowly. I've got a '93 supercab with the 3.0l, 5speed, 2wd. If I short shift it before 2000rpm and keep it under 60mph, I can get 25-26mpg on the highway. That's about as good as it gets with these trucks. If I drive it like I'd like to, I get 18.

The recipe for fuel economy is small, light, and underpowered.
 
Maintenance plays a big roll. You might want to lower the truck a few inches for better aerodymanics. A tonneau cover helped me out on highway trips (noticed about 1mpg more). Highway tires that provide hard rubber and low rolling resistance (keep them inflated at same pressure) There are small improvements you can make but the biggest factor is how you drive. What is your axle ratio? A numerically lower ratio will improve highway mileage.
 
A cat-back exhaust will give you the best bang for the buck. I picked up 3 mpg highway, city is no different.
Keep weight out of it and don't haul around junk you don't need.
Synthetic oil and axle lube.
As mentioned, a tonneau will help a little.
There is no miracle that will instantly give you another 5 mpg.
 
Underdrive crank pulley, electric fan and synthetic fluids would be a good start for improving fuel economy and freeing up a little bit of power. I have also found that the 3.0 yields slightly better fuel economy with more aggressive driving--keeping RPM's in the 2500-4k range while accelerating and turning O/D off/taking it out of O/D while pulling steeper inclines. I've tried both driving styles--keeping rpms as low as possible and keeping the revs up, keeping the revs up yielded over 1 mpg better than lugging it. Go figure.

These trucks can do decent at the pump. I easily average 20mpg mixed driving on gasoline.
 
Underdrive crank pulley, electric fan and synthetic fluids would be a good start for improving fuel economy and freeing up a little bit of power. I have also found that the 3.0 yields slightly better fuel economy with more aggressive driving--keeping RPM's in the 2500-4k range while accelerating and turning O/D off/taking it out of O/D while pulling steeper inclines. I've tried both driving styles--keeping rpms as low as possible and keeping the revs up, keeping the revs up yielded over 1 mpg better than lugging it. Go figure.

These trucks can do decent at the pump. I easily average 20mpg mixed driving on gasoline.

I agree. My truck is a 2wd auto with 3.73's, a limited slip, and big 18's (not the best combo for fuel economy). I've got underdrive pullies, an air intake, e-fan, and exhaust. I drive the truck like I stole it most of the time, and get 20-22 mpg on gasoline and 18 on e-85.
 
Even though there are many complaints about the Vulcan V6, I have to ask if it's really that bad power wise. It's got 183 cubic inches of displacement and it makes around 150 hp. That's almost 1hp/ci. I remember back in the 70s that 350s were making around 180hp and 460s were rated around a little over 200hp. It could be that the Vulcan doesn't respond well to hp upgrades because Ford has already done a decent job of optimizing the design.

Sure, I'd love to be able to get 1hp/ci out of it, but the engine tha can do that naturally aspirated is rare.

I remember a truck I had in the '80s. 2.0L 4cylinder (121cid) 80 horse power. The BEST mpg it would get was 28mpg. My ranger has close to double the power and gets pretty much the same mpg. In that perspective, it's not doing too badly.
 
Last edited:
I really doubt you get 28mpg unless you burned your whole tank of gas driving 60mph down the interstate tailgating a semi-truck.

And yes, the 3.0L in my opinion is underpowered. It barely tows more than the DOHC 2.3 and sucks fuel like a 4.0L. I towed a 22 foot flatbed trailer (2000lbs of scrap+1200lbs of trailer) behind my old 93 3.0L 5 speed 3.73:1 gears and on some of the grades and hills I was forced to run in 2nd gear screaming at 4500-5000rpm just so I wouldn't lose more speed. My new 4.0L SOHC auto 4.10:1 pulled the same trailer with my wrecked V8 ranger no motor/trans (2300lbs+1200lbs trailer) up similar hills and would consistantly hold 4th gear rarely unlocking the torque converter.

The 3.0L is reliable for the most part, but it does suffer from a few issues (camshaft sensor)
 
I really doubt you get 28mpg unless you burned your whole tank of gas driving 60mph down the interstate tailgating a semi-truck.


Never said I got 28 in the Ranger. The 28mpg was in a Mitsubishi built, Plymouth Arrow pickup truck. We used to call them mini-trucks. A bit smaller than the Rangers which are considered mid-sized. It had 4 cylinders, half the horsepower and didn't get much better fuel economy than my V6 Ranger does today, which on the highway I've gotten as high as 26mpg on a 70 mile round trip out and back on the same route. That was a one time best. I can consistently get 24-25 if I baby it.


And yes, the 3.0L in my opinion is underpowered. It barely tows more than the DOHC 2.3 and sucks fuel like a 4.0L. I towed a 22 foot flatbed trailer (2000lbs of scrap+1200lbs of trailer) behind my old 93 3.0L 5 speed 3.73:1 gears and on some of the grades and hills I was forced to run in 2nd gear screaming at 4500-5000rpm just so I wouldn't lose more speed. My new 4.0L SOHC auto 4.10:1 pulled the same trailer with my wrecked V8 ranger no motor/trans (2300lbs+1200lbs trailer) up similar hills and would consistantly hold 4th gear rarely unlocking the torque converter.


Wait, you're comparing a 93, 3.0 to another truck with 1 liter more displacement and a much lower rear gear? Yeah, I can see there being a difference there.


The 3.0L is reliable for the most part, but it does suffer from a few issues (camshaft sensor)

Mine doesn't. :headbang: God, I love that distributor. :D
 
I remember a truck I had in the '80s. 2.0L 4cylinder (121cid) 80 horse power. The BEST mpg it would get was 28mpg. My ranger has close to double the power and gets pretty much the same mpg. In that perspective, it's not doing too badly.

You just stated your ranger has double the power and pretty much gets the same mpg. Yes, I'm comparing another drivetrain that the ranger has to offer. Point being, if you are going to use the ranger for light duty payloads and minimal towing a 2.3L will do the same exact job as the 3.0L with less fuel. If you are going to tow anything more than a lawn mower then I suggest skipping the 3.0L all together and going with a healthier 4.0L. Obviously ford feels the same way because they don't offer it either. I've owned a 3.0L and 4.0L and driven friend's 2.3Ls, you can pretend the 3.0L is an agile engine with its 0.819hp/ci but that is not uncommon for todays engines. The 4.0L SOHC makes 0.845hp/ci and the 2.3L DOHC makes 1.021hp/ci. So by your numbers the 3.0L is the lowest on the totem pole. Side note, I'm actually impressed with the Civic Si's 1.377hp/ci! From a civic!? lol

Be aware that your distributor uses the same cam gear and bushings (the fail point) Once again, this isn't a guarentee failure at 100K, but its something to take note if you hear the tell tail bushing squeal. Just like all 2.9 owners watch out for cracked heads and 4.0L ohv guys watch for tapping lifters and even yet the pre 2003 4.0L SOHCs have to keep an ear out for the timing chain rattle.
 
maintenance is the main thing...


other than that and a few small gains from stuff mentioned above,
get a small car if you're worried about MPG's...

there's only so much you can pull out of a truck.
 
I agree. My truck is a 2wd auto with 3.73's, a limited slip, and big 18's (not the best combo for fuel economy). I've got underdrive pullies, an air intake, e-fan, and exhaust. I drive the truck like I stole it most of the time, and get 20-22 mpg on gasoline and 18 on e-85.

dang! thats really good mileage. What type of exhaust did you put on it? and what type of intake system?
 

Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad

TRS Events

Member & Vendor Upgrades

For a small yearly donation, you can support this forum and receive a 'Supporting Member' banner, or become a 'Supporting Vendor' and promote your products here. Click the banner to find out how.

Latest posts

Recently Featured

Want to see your truck here? Share your photos and details in the forum.

Ranger Adventure Video

TRS Merchandise

Follow TRS On Instagram

TRS Sponsors


Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad


Amazon Deals

Sponsored Ad

Back
Top