Are all 3.0's Gutless??

[medicbro2000]

Can someone honestly tell me if all 3.0's are gutless or is this just mine. I take a ride up the interstate and start headed up a hill and the thing has to stay in passing gear to make it up the hill. In a nut shell- it makes a lot of noise and has little pull to show for it.

I feel like a little 4cyl would smoke it!!

 

[scotttmbolt]

I have heard the 3.0's are junk... but don't hold me to it. I have the 4.0 SOHC and I love it. Maybe not the best on gas mileage but when towing I can't honestly even tell I am pulling something. Up hill climbs are easy, and it makes a nice sound

But yeah, when I bought my Ranger there were a few at the dealership that had 3.0's and 4.0's. There was a guy there looking for a used car for his son who told me he worked for Ford and that the 3.0's aren't made as good as the 4.0's and have very little power. Dealer said the same thing (because we all know they are sooooooo legitimate) :

BUT again, I have never driven one. If I had the chance to I would do it just to compare.

 

[HahnsB2]

I'd drive a 2.9 before I'd drive a 3.0. The 3.0 makes 5 less ft-lbs and has to spin 1000RPMs higher than a 2.9 to reach peak (2600 VS 3600). It's not a truck motor. The best thing you can do is rev the piss out of it like it was designed to do.

 

[yellowford]

I drive one on a regular basis it has the five speed and does fine for power, I don't have to downshift when passing just if there is a big hill. The towing I've done with it wasn't to bad but it was only a utility trailer and i could definitely tell it was there. But it doesn't compare to my 5.0 in my explorer but it gets better gas mileage than the explorer.

 

[yostyexplorer94]

My buddy has a 2000 5 speed 3.0 ranger and it does pretty good for a 3.0, I know someone else who had an automatic 3.0 and that thing was a dog.

 

[atlranger]

I've got a extended cab flare side 3.0 5spd with 145k+ and it is defiantly a dog.

I drive rental cars during the week, when I drive home from the airport I am always thinking why did I buy it with this engine? On the highway in 5th up any grade or against a headwind you have to put it to the floor or rev it out in a lower gear.

It does make my wife's 4.0 SOHC feel like a v8 in comparison.

I'm keeping my eye's open for a 5.0 I can drop intoit.

 

[MountaineerGreen]

My 93 3.0 5 Speed does pretty well, but I have learned how to make it do that. 3k plus is where the engine really starts to pull. I'd bet with an auto trans, it would be a dog, but the 5 speed, driven correctly, does well. Granted it's not an extended cab, so it weighs less.

I had a 2.9 Auto, the head warping issue with those engines steered me away from them.

 

[billj9]

Anemic 3.0

My '99 Ranger with a 3.0 automatic has served me well for just over 100,000 miles, but my previous truck was a 4 cyl. Toyota Tacoma 5 speed. You could really wind it out with that stick and it never seemed to lack for power. My earliest impression of my Ranger that first week was how slow it accelerated. Over time you learn to drive it. Keep your momentum up and avoid having to stomp on the gas pedal or brakes as much as possible.

 

[RangerX]

Can someone honestly tell me if all 3.0's are gutless or is this just mine.

What size tires are you running, larger than stock? What is the axle gear ratio, maybe it's not the best?

 

[tnubigboy]

I have an 03 3.0 and it used to act very sluggish up hills on the interstate. i bought a jet chip programmer item #15003, and the difference is quite noticeable. it performs much better even though its not a 5.0 like i am still looking for.

 

[medicbro2000]

I definetly agree that the 3.0 is not a TRUCK motor. I have 31" tires on it, which, amazingly is a recommended tire size. I will not go anything bigger, as much as I would like to, because I know it wouldn't even go anywhere then. I definetly agree with all of you that for the most part the 3.0 is a dog. If I had only known 3 years ago I wouldn't have bought it. It doesn't even get BETTER gas mileage.

Off road though, the thing is pretty badass. Will climb anything you put in front of it. Definetly not a highway vehicle. Thanks for your replies all. I just had to get the overall opinion just to be sure it wasn't just my personal feelings getting in the way. I think I will pursue possibly dropping in a 4.0 down the road, as long as it doesn;t involve too much bs.......we'll see.

THANKS

 

[HahnsB2]

Get lower gears, a set of 4.56s will do wonders for acceleration and mileage.

 

[MDub]

I have a 99 3.0 with a 5 speed, extended cab, topper shell, 31" BFG's and about 200-300lbs in the bed at all times. Plus I live at 9000' above sea level. It does OK if you keep the RPMs up. Below 3K it has virtually no power. I routinely run it at 4K in 3rd gear going up mountain passes as high as 12000 feet. It has 141,000 on the clock right now and runs great. In 4x4 Low I have no lack of torque. I love my truck, but I do wish I had the 4.0. The 4.0 I-6 in my 88 heep cherokee has WAY more pull. There's no comparison in power.

That said, my 3.0 has never left me stranded, even when driving 500 miles in the middle of winter with the number 6 cylinder not firing (bad wire/ fouled plug).

 

[wrigley_1285]

i had a b3000 4x4 with a 5 speed. i thought it was really good with the manual trans. one of my buddies had a ranger 3.0 with an auto and it was a dog. the thing was seriously horrible. the trans makes a huge difference with those engines. one of my friends has a 4 cyl with an auto and i like it more than the 3.0 auto.

 

[mr_roboteye]

Are 3.0's gutless? Stock with an auto trans, yes. But a 5 speed with a little work, very nice. As others have said, it really comes alive after 3 grand.

Clicky----->http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=228343

later,

Dave R.

 

[4x4junkie]

Get lower gears, a set of 4.56s will do wonders for acceleration and mileage.

+1,000,000

The 3.0L is only a dog because the gearing sucks. They NEED to SPIN! 4.56 will wake it up big time if you have 31s on it.

BTW, the 2.9L is 140 horse, the 3.0L is anywhere from 145-150 depending on year.

 

[HahnsB2]

BTW, the 2.9L is 140 horse, the 3.0L is anywhere from 145-150 depending on year.

I know but I'd rather have the 5 extra ft-lbs 1000RPMs lower...

 

[4x4junkie]

Actually it could be anywhere from 8 less to 20 more. But agreed, the lower RPM torque peak is way better.

 

[dtl 2k2 sport]

I bought an XL 3.0 4X2 LAST year, and it was great on gas, 25avg,mpg. But as far as power went it deff wasnt the greatest truck, and i have a 4.0 in my explorer. The truck got hit in a slow accident and folded horribly. Sense then i've sold it and bought a 07 colorado 4x4 w/ a 4cly. The power is much better and i run 31's on that every day and it'll go right down the highway no problem. BUT gas milage sucks! 19MPg IF i'm good. I never had a chance to take my ranger out to the mtns to see how it handled but i'm sure it would scream a little.

 

[downzero]

Mine has nearly 160,000 miles on it and seems fine to me. I have a 400+ horsepower/750+ ft lb Diesel truck as well, so it's not like I don't know what power feels like.

For a little truck, the 3.0 is fine if you ask me. Mine has a 5 speed; I won't own an automatic in anything.

Mine has 3.73s and 215/75R15s. With 31s, it certainly could use more power, but like everyone said, gearing makes a big difference. The trucks that come with the 3.0 and 30" tall tires from the factory have 4.10 gears.