Ranger with auto transmission

[superj]

I don't believe I have ever driven a ranger with an automatic transmission so I have a question.

My youngest son needs a vehicle to replace his Wrangler because he said 9-10mpg sucks and cold sucks. An extended cab 98 ranger with 3.0 and auto showed up near by for a good price and it's a clean looking truck.

How is a 3.0 ranger and automatic?

 

[RonD]

Will feel under powered
3.0l Vulcan got the nick name 3.slow because its a High RPM engine, by design, makes best torque/power at 3,500-3,800rpm, most engines do that at 2,500-2,800rpm, like the 4cyl 2.3l/2.5l Lima or 4.0l V6

With a manual trans you can hold it in correct gear to keep RPMs high, and you can as well in an automatic but kind of defeats the purpose of an "automatic", lol
For around town or highway driving its just fine

It will have a 4R44E automatic, like any automatic they get expensive to rebuild, but if serviced it should last to 250k miles
Has a good reputation, Ranger used same automatic from 1985 thru 2011, different model numbers but basically the same inside

 

[superj]

Ok. Thanks. He said he just wants something that will feel warm when driving in the snow and gets better mileage

 

[sgtsandman]

Ok. Thanks. He said he just wants something that will feel warm when driving in the snow and gets better mileage

It will meet those two criteria.

 

[RonD]

Warm in the snow.............avoid the convertible Ranger models, the tops tended to stick anyways

But, kidding aside, reverse the two heater hoses at the firewall, on ANY vehicle, every 2 years
This back flushes heater core while you drive, to keep them cleaner, so they last longer
And you lose very little coolant, if any

Heater core on 1995 and up Rangers is a pain to change

 

[racsan]

Ive only had (1) 3.0 & (1) automatic ranger, both in the same truck, a ‘97 2wd longbed. Bought it for $500, 1st was out but could start in 2nd then shift to D above 30 mph. Had 3.45 gears so was super doggy on takeoff (esp since it was starting from a dead stop in 2nd) . once it was up to speed it seemed to be ok. Id put a 4.10 rear axle in one if I had another and it would probably be ok. Im not a big fan of automatics, they have their place sure. The 3.0 isnt a bad engine, it just makes its power higher in the rpm band , Ive never understood why ford put so many 3.45 axles with that engine, it needs at least a 3.73 preferably 4.10 - and thats with stock size tires. Cruising rpm @55 with 3.45’s & overdrive would be somewhere around 1300 rpm which is way too low, needs to be more around 2000 to 2500 rpm , wouldnt even hurt it to be doing 3000. I didnt have my ‘97 very long, the bed is on my current ‘94, the engine went to s.c. and other parts of it went to toledo. the rear frame was made into a trailer which I still have & use. I certainly got my $500 worth from it, wouldnt shy away from another- would change the rear axle though, esp if its 3.45

 

[lil_Blue_Ford]

My only 3.0 was a manual with 3.73 gears. It was ok at low RPMs but really woke up with the higher RPMs. Not sure if a shift kit could help or not. I will say that a shift kit in my 92 with the 4.0, auto and 3.73 was a huge difference in performance over not having the shift kit.

 

[superj]

the dude had sold it the next day when i messaged him. kind of bummed but my wife bought him a Mazda 6 sport (that oddly looks very similar to her Mazda 3) so he will get gas mileage and all the stuff he wanted.