New to 4.0

[James Morse]

I just got the 97 XLT and I was wondering do I have to check timing guides or something like that? I know there was a lot of talk about these failing and being the first thing you should do but I'm not sure if that applies to my 4.0

 

[rusty ol ranger]

I just got the 97 XLT and I was wondering do I have to check timing guides or something like that? I know there was a lot of talk about these failing and being the first thing you should do but I'm not sure if that applies to my 4.0

You mean the chain tensioners? Thats only on the SOHC 4.0 (2000+). You have the OHV 4.0 which is a pretty solid motor

 

[Dantheman1540]

The 4.0 OHV is tough! Enjoy the extra torque is has compared to the smaller motors.

 

[James Morse]

Yes the tensioners, I heard so much talk about it. Well that's a plus for the 97 then to not worry about that.
3.0L is fine, truck ('99) goes, but the hp/torque in the 4.0L even though the numbers aren't all that different, I think, you really notice it. At low rpm a little throttle brings on the power no problem, it almost seems to growl, and I'm maybe not describing that right, but the point is you feel it's got guts.
I usually drive pretty easy on it, no reason not to and logic says if you are easy on things they last longer. Correct me if I'm wrong here but I'm pretty sure it'll be in 3rd before 30mph in a gentle acceleration.
Diff question Is my tranny different than my '99 3.0L? I understand about the splitting of first gear to 2 vs actually another gear, not sure if mine is like that. Just curious.
So far anything different I see on the 97 is better or ruggeder compared to the 99. For example the 99 has a steering knuckle boot that's rubber, the 97 has more of a solid shield looks like it would not be so prone to tearing. Just stuff like that. I guess what I'm saying is I don't see where the newer ones were really improved, seems the opposite. I'm sure I'll get push back about that. True the newer engines are yet more powerful but the 97's 4.0L is a beast compared to the 3.0L. I haven't compared torque old 4.0L to new 4.0L, but I'd rather have something more reliable and a bit less powerful than the opposite.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

Yes the tensioners, I heard so much talk about it. Well that's a plus for the 97 then to not worry about that.
3.0L is fine, truck ('99) goes, but the hp/torque in the 4.0L even though the numbers aren't all that different, I think, you really notice it. At low rpm a little throttle brings on the power no problem, it almost seems to growl, and I'm maybe not describing that right, but the point is you feel it's got guts.
I usually drive pretty easy on it, no reason not to and logic says if you are easy on things they last longer. Correct me if I'm wrong here but I'm pretty sure it'll be in 3rd before 30mph in a gentle acceleration.
Diff question Is my tranny different than my '99 3.0L? I understand about the splitting of first gear to 2 vs actually another gear, not sure if mine is like that. Just curious.
So far anything different I see on the 97 is better or ruggeder compared to the 99. For example the 99 has a steering knuckle boot that's rubber, the 97 has more of a solid shield looks like it would not be so prone to tearing. Just stuff like that. I guess what I'm saying is I don't see where the newer ones were really improved, seems the opposite. I'm sure I'll get push back about that. True the newer engines are yet more powerful but the 97's 4.0L is a beast compared to the 3.0L. I haven't compared torque old 4.0L to new 4.0L, but I'd rather have something more reliable and a bit less powerful than the opposite.

The 3.0 is the weakest feeling of all the 6's

 

[Dantheman1540]

The 3.0 feels like a 4cylinder to me, it’s pretty pathetic compared to a 4.0 OHV IMO.

I totally get what you mean when you say the 4.0 has a low growl to it, even tho mine has 3.27 gears and 32”MTs it feels peppy.

 

[superj]

having driven many many four cylinder rangers, the 3.0 does not feel like a four cylinder.

and all were standard transmissions too. i have never driven a ranger with an automatic in it so i cannot comment on that but the 3.0 with a five speed is fun to drive. no hotrod but not terrible.


i always wonder how a 4.0 and a five speed would be. i bet that would be a blast.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

having driven many many four cylinder rangers, the 3.0 does not feel like a four cylinder.

and all were standard transmissions too. i have never driven a ranger with an automatic in it so i cannot comment on that but the 3.0 with a five speed is fun to drive. no hotrod but not terrible.


i always wonder how a 4.0 and a five speed would be. i bet that would be a blast.

Im biased but IMO the 2.9 with a 5sp is the most fun. They pull hard down low but you can still rap them out into the revs and it doesnt really fall on its face.

The 3.0 just really, really lacks low end torque.

 

[superj]

i think the first ranger i ever drove, my dad's first company ranger, had that engine in it. it was an 80s ranger, the old body style and a five speed. it was a fun little truck. it never had any problems going anywhere and it would spin the tires for a decent bit when you dropped the clutch.

that is the 3.0s only issue and i bet with an automatic transmission, the truck does feel really crappy. i keep thinking how much of a dog it would be if it was an auto. probably feel exactly like a 4 banger with an auto which is exactly why i don't even go look at four cylinder autos or 3.0 autos

 

[rusty ol ranger]

i think the first ranger i ever drove, my dad's first company ranger, had that engine in it. it was an 80s ranger, the old body style and a five speed. it was a fun little truck. it never had any problems going anywhere and it would spin the tires for a decent bit when you dropped the clutch.

that is the 3.0s only issue and i bet with an automatic transmission, the truck does feel really crappy. i keep thinking how much of a dog it would be if it was an auto. probably feel exactly like a 4 banger with an auto which is exactly why i don't even go look at four cylinder autos or 3.0 autos

If it spun the tires chances are its a 2.9. Ive driven 2.0's and 2.3's in the older ones and they are unbearably slow.

The 3.0s ive driven actually seem quicker then the 2.9's on a 55-80 run. But in streetlight to streetlight gears a 2.9 will rip one to pieces.