3.0?

[RU MAN]

I might be buying a ranger with a 3.0L. How good are the engines.

The truck has 135,000 miles on it.
With 33's
5.5 Lift(i think)
5-speed
Price $6,200

Do you think this is a good deal?
how long would you think this truck is going to last?
Any info would be appreciated, thanks.

 

[HIX]

Don't get the 3.0. I hear they have even more problems than the 4.0. They ping ssssoooooo much. Think of your explorer being even slower than it is. That's a 3.0

 

[rpenner54]

I test drove a Ranger short bed regular cab 4x4 3.0 once. Lets just say it didn't have enough power for me. Course somehow I ended up with a Explorer with the 4.0 so I don't know whats up with that.

 

[4x4Ranger]

They're good motors. The 98+ 3.0's ping. I have that 3.0 in my 91 Probe. Over 200k on it so far. It is common for them to use oil though. My Probe has used a quart every 1000 miles since I bought it with 15k miles on it....

In a Ranger though they are kinda underpowered. Hopefully that truck had gears installed or else its really gonna be a dog.

 

[Kirby N.]

My brother's 3.0 in his 2x4 is VERY quike. it will spank my 4.0 explorer4x4 any time. He has a chip, exhaust, cold air intake and jacobs ignition... and it was fast before that. Of course add 33's and the wieght of a front end and it is probably another story.

 

[Bryan]

I've got a 3.0L in my '96. It has 5.5" of lift and 31's. For me there was some definate power loss in the upper end. It is basically stock (k&n & a flow) so there might be ways to regain the power. I really want to reagear and that should help. I havent had any probs yet, but I am at 60K. I haven't heard many good things about the 3.0's though. Supposedly a many tsb's. I think the price migh be high for that many miles, check the bluebook. Also, how new/old is the lift? It could conceivably go two ways, it lasts forever with no prob's, or it could die tomorrow. My dad's mazda engine just cracked at 130K. Whenever I get my next Ranger, I will definately go with the 4.0. Good luck.

 

[Nick K]

My Dads got 99 Ranger extended bed extended cab 4X2 witha 3.0 and it's slow, i raced him a couple of times and the explorers torque can't be matched he will be me in top speed because of the high gearing, but off the line not a chance

 

[jimbo74]

my dad has a supercab 4x2 1998 with the 3.0 and it feels quicker or close to my explorer. although it wont go past 95 mph because of the limiter

 

[sohowcome]

Hell just toss out the 3.0, and 4.0 and use the 5.0 Yummy it is fast and fun. Replaced the 2.9 that came in my stock '88 with a 5.0 kinda a tight squeze course you need a different tranny.....but hey those are details

 

[briantf]

3L is adequate

I have driven 4L Explorers, Navajo's and Rangers. I am not impressed. An old roommate of mine had a 92 Navajo, leaked oil all over the damn place. The 4L seem to run out of poop at 4000 rpm, every manual I've driven (Navajo and Ranger) had me reaching for more gears.

I thought the lack of power in a 4L was unusual; Buick's 3.8L has good steam, I was really disappointed.

I got a 3L on my 97 Ranger b/c they didn't offer a 4L on the XL and I have no regrets. The only downside is the 7.5" rearend, but it's plenty strong enough for anything up to 33's. It also pulls right up to 5600 rpm with no hesitations. The only 4L I would want in my truck is the SOHC from my wife's 98 Explorer. THAT's a 4L worth having!!

Go to www.fordranger.com and ask around the 4x4 board. I think the consensus will be that $6.2K is high for that much mileage and an old lift.

If the manual trans isn't new, you will be buying a new one soon. They last longer on 3L than 4L's, but they die.

My engine has been dead on reliable for 47K, I think I have a bad O2 sensor on one side, but the plugs on the pass. side looked almost brand new when I replaced them. I've had no pinging, no nothing. Great offroad, fine on the road. I get 18 mpg at 80+ on the freeway, not great but liveable.

Regards,
Brian in CA