Ranger 2.3 or 3.0/Motorcycle

[Chris04ST]

Hey guys,

It's been awhile since I've been back on this forum and my first time in the Ranger section.

I'm looking to purchase my first Ranger and have a question about the towing/hauling capabilities of the different Ranger engines. I'm planning on getting the Ranger because I'm looking for something that is not full-sized and can haul a ~450lb motorcycle to and from school. 4WD isn't necessary but I would really enjoy having a manual transmission. I'm set on a 2D Regular Cab and it really only comes down to the engine.

So my question to you guys; Is the 2.3L capable of this? Will the 3.0 be any better? Suggestions?

Thank you!

 

[RangerX]

IMO, the 4.0 is the best Ranger engine, followed by the 2.3. I see lots of complaints here about the 3.0.

 

[Chris04ST]

Any complaints about the 3.0 that stand out? How do you think the 2.3 would perform with a motorcycle in the bed?

 

[Tbars4]

...Are you looking for simple and easy or is this going to be a project vehicle...?

..The 3.0 has head and misfire issues but when they are running in top condition they are fine..

..As mentioned, the 4.0 would be the best and couple it with a manual trans you could get better fuel economy...

...As for the 2.3L which I am a huge fan of, it depends on a few things...

..You didn't say what years you are looking at as the newer motors have a few more HP...I myself like the 95-97 (older) 4x4 2.3's because they are somewhat rare and usually come with twin sticks and 4.10 gears which would help in hauling the load, not counting the 4x4 can take you in and out of better places to ride your bike in all kinds of conditions..

..It also depends if you live in the hills or the flats...

..If you go to larger tires on the 2.3L and have say 3.73 gears you may hate the sight of large hills when carrying a load or even when empty..

..I've run my 2.3L carrying about 1000#'s regular (with some other upgrades) but with stock 4:10 gears and BFG AT KO 32's for a long time while getting decent gas mileage and kinda hauling pretty well up the big hills, but had to go to 4:88's when I moved up to 33's to haul the same load...

..I actually gained a bit more pulling power but my truck lost 10 mph on the freeway..(was happy going 70 mph now it's whining at 60) and the fuel economy is greater now in the city and long distance trips the fuel economy has dropped do to the higher rpm's..

...IMHO you will be fine with any of these just to haul the bike...

The 4.0 and 2.3 will serve the same purpose with some differences and the 3.0 would be fine but count on being 1 of the 9 out of 10 who experience issues with it when you go to purchase your Ranger...Just my .02..

 

[Chris04ST]

...Are you looking for simple and easy or is this going to be a project vehicle...?

..The 3.0 has head and misfire issues but when they are running in top condition they are fine..

..As mentioned, the 4.0 would be the best and couple it with a manual trans you could get better fuel economy...

...As for the 2.3L which I am a huge fan of, it depends on a few things...

..You didn't say what years you are looking at as the newer motors have a few more HP...I myself like the 95-97 (older) 4x4 2.3's because they are somewhat rare and usually come with twin sticks and 4.10 gears which would help in hauling the load, not counting the 4x4 can take you in and out of better places to ride your bike in all kinds of conditions..

..It also depends if you live in the hills or the flats...

..If you go to larger tires on the 2.3L and have say 3.73 gears you may hate the sight of large hills when carrying a load or even when empty..

..I've run my 2.3L carrying about 1000#'s regular (with some other upgrades) but with stock 4:10 gears and BFG AT KO 32's for a long time while getting decent gas mileage and kinda hauling pretty well up the big hills, but had to go to 4:88's when I moved up to 33's to haul the same load...

..I actually gained a bit more pulling power but my truck lost 10 mph on the freeway..(was happy going 70 mph now it's whining at 60) and the fuel economy is greater now in the city and long distance trips the fuel economy has dropped do to the higher rpm's..

...IMHO you will be fine with any of these just to haul the bike...

The 4.0 and 2.3 will serve the same purpose with some differences and the 3.0 would be fine but count on being 1 of the 9 out of 10 who experience issues with it when you go to purchase your Ranger...Just my .02..

Thanks for the awesome reply! I'm looking at 2004+ years and I'm not really looking to modify it that much. If I get the 4.0/4x4 then I might do something there if possible. If I get the 2.3 then it will be kept stock.

It's pretty flat where I am. The only hills I'd be taking are the ones along I-25 so I think the 2.3 would suit well. Hopefully I can find a 4.0!

 

[Tbars4]

..Aw shucks..

..I'm just a huge Ranger fan at heart and You will enjoy which ever one you choose..

..But please post back here and let us know what you wound up with and feel free to start your free Ranger Registry here too..:biggthump

 

[Chris04ST]

Sounds good! Thanks for your help!