Real Life Fuel Economy in V6?

[JohnnyO]

I guess you need to look at my Courier frame..well it's like a 1978 model...it's bad...from what I know..it's from GA. Already rusted through....

"Already...?" And it's a '78? Dude, we got a whole different paradigm up here. My daughter's Jeep is a '97 and I bet it's got more rust underneath than your '78 Courier. Just had it at a shop for two days figuring out a way to mount two new rear shocks to very little metal. It's partly my fault, I hate living here but I don't move away.[/OT]

 

[Jaymez]

Something has boggled my mind from the beginning of this thread. You claim that your girlfriend (with a heavy foot) gets a consistent 25mpg out of her Sport Trac. I find that hard to believe, although not necessarily impossible.
A Ranger is lighter and has a smaller profile and can be found with several smaller powerplants than the Sport Trac. As long as you have properly sized tires and proper gearing, and you don't drive it like a race car, you should see decent fuel mileage - at least as good as a Sport Trac.
If economy is a priority, you have to be willing to resign yourself to the fact that a 4cyl won't have V8 power. And you also have to keep in mind that trucks in general aren't designed for economy, they are designed for being trucks.

The reason for the thread is because I am a Chevy guy that has next to no experience with Fords. The girlfriend's fuel economy claims were enough to get me interested in purchasing a vehicle similar to hers for commuting purposes.

However, all the independent research that I'd done before joining the forum pointed to an average of 21MPG highway with 4.0 RBV's, which while respectable, is only 2MPG better than my GMC and not enough to justify the purchase of a RBV. On longer trips, I can probably match or do better in the GMC at that point.

That's where you guys came into the picture. Go to those who know the trucks and see what they have to say. According to the majority in this thread, if I want a Ranger to achieve the MPG's I'm looking for, I need to settle for a 4 cylinder 2WD.

I now find myself needing to test drive four cylinder trucks. However, the two closest Ford dealers don't have any Rangers on their lots and pickings at the local Chevy/GMC dealers are pretty slim for Colorados and Canyons. This is especially true for ECSB 2WD'.

All of the Colorados and Canyons I am finding are 4x4 CCSB's with 5cylinders. Since I am already familiar with 5 cyl Colorados and I cannot fit in the back seat of a CCSB Colly, I now want to compare a 4 cyl Ranger ECSB 2WD with a 4 cyl Colly ECSB 2WD.

 

[Superman]

"Already...?" And it's a '78? Dude, we got a whole different paradigm up here. My daughter's Jeep is a '97 and I bet it's got more rust underneath than your '78 Courier. Just had it at a shop for two days figuring out a way to mount two new rear shocks to very little metal. It's partly my fault, I hate living here but I don't move away.[/OT]

Oh, I think this truck of mine has been rusted through before I got it.

It has no driver floorboard...it's a complete rust bucket. I am going to have to start with a new 2wd body and frame and make it back to 4x4 like the company did.


Here is the rear frame (did sand it some and painted but it didn't help). It's worse in person....someone didn't care about it but boy they didn't know they had a truck that was rare either. So slap in their face.

 

[Jaymez]

That's nothing. When I get home, I'll post pics of my 87 Fullsize frame.

 

[Superman]

LOL. Can't wait....NO CHEATING! As in car wrecks.

 

[Jaymez]

This is my current project, before I started really trying to clean the frame. I bet I had brushed away 15-20'bs of rust flakes.

1987 Chevy K10 RCLB, truck spent its whole life in CT.

Album

 

[Superman]

Well has it rusted through completely to any part of the frame like mine? Lol.

 

[loneranger04]

i have 3.0 and comute 250 miles on a daily basis i get around 21 mpg. i am military so it is paromount i comute. i have a 2004 ranger edge ext cab with the under pully mod from stufforyourranger.com i do recomend this cuz it adds a little more get up and go to 3.0 and few more mpg. i have 4.10 gears in my ranger. but with a little tinkering im sure you can get more.

 

[Jaymez]

Well has it rusted through completely to any part of the frame like mine? Lol.

One of my rear cross members might as well not be. What very little that is left is the metal version of swiss cheese.

 

[Jaymez]

i have 3.0 and comute 250 miles on a daily basis i get around 21 mpg. i am military so it is paromount i comute. i have a 2004 ranger edge ext cab with the under pully mod from stufforyourranger.com i do recomend this cuz it adds a little more get up and go to 3.0 and few more mpg. i have 4.10 gears in my ranger. but with a little tinkering im sure you can get more.

Assuming I bought a relatively new Ranger, 4.0, ECSB, Auto, no older than 2005, what would be the ideal mods to gain more MPG's? At this point, I don't care if the recommendations are for a 2WD or 4WD.

 

[Ruffinit]

My truck with the 2.3 Lima, 3.45 gears and manual trans, 2wd has seen as high as 31 hwy. More realistically I get around 28-29 on road trips. City driving (2 miles down the road to my girlfriend's house, and two miles back) I get about 23-25 mpg.

As far as the power thing goes... My 2.3 Lima can be a little frustrating at times. But if you get one of the newer (as in the last 10 years) duratec 2.3 motors you should be alright, I hear they're quite the peppy little buggers.

With a little patience I don't see your goal of 28 being a problem with a 2wd

I'm hear to tell you that the 2.3L DuraTec is quite peppy. Rated at 148hp (2003) it redlines at 5500 and will get there quickly. In 3rd it'll do 85 with the 4:10s. It also tows quite nicely. I bought this Ranger based upon a test drive of a new one which had the same engine. I'd driven the older (lima) engined Rangers and wasn't impressed by the mileage or the power. The leg room was also a concern for the normal cab, but they extended the cab in 2001 by 2 or 3 inches and that made all the difference in the world. When I test drove my 2003, they let me do a commute with it which was 140 miles. It got 28.7 (it had been on the lot for 16 months). I was sold.

 

[jeffw920]

i have 02 4.0l 4x4 with 4.10s and routinely get 20 if its all highway, about 18.5 average in combined driving commuting to school. i do have a catback and a programmer but i accelerate pretty hard sometimes. . . is that 25mpg in the sport trac the readout given by the little computer on the dash? i've found those are usually a little optimistic.

 

[jeffw920]

i can tell you my 02 4.0 4x4 w/ 4.10's gets 20mpg highway, all time record of 21.2mpg with a gibson catback and superchips cortex on performance tune. Compared with my brother's 04 fx4 4.0l w/4.10s which on the same trip got just under 18mpg. so for me at least exhaust and chip helped.

 

[JohnnyO]

Assuming I bought a relatively new Ranger, 4.0, ECSB, Auto, no older than 2005, what would be the ideal mods to gain more MPG's? At this point, I don't care if the recommendations are for a 2WD or 4WD.

Cat-back exhaust and a tuner or chip. XCalIII is probably the best tuner.
Don't lift it or put on bigger or more aggressive tires.