1983 - 2012 Ranger & B-Series All Ford Ranger and Mazda B-Series models

2002 ranger gets 20 mpg??

  #1  
Old 04-14-2011, 10:08 PM
john72ss's Avatar
john72ss
john72ss is offline
Mountain Pass
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: southwest washington (th
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 3 Posts
2002 ranger gets 20 mpg??

ok first fill up, 2002, 3.0 auto 2 wheel drive driving conservativly got only 20 mpg??? any suggestions? maybe has original plugs? whats a good plug for this engine?
 
  #2  
Old 04-14-2011, 11:08 PM
mfp4073's Avatar
mfp4073
mfp4073 is offline
Fleet Mechanic
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: down south
Posts: 1,725
Received 10 Likes on 8 Posts
sounds about right to me. I wish I got 20 in mine.
 
  #3  
Old 04-14-2011, 11:10 PM
john72ss's Avatar
john72ss
john72ss is offline
Mountain Pass
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: southwest washington (th
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 3 Posts
well i think its pathetic! my 1988 2.9 four wheel drive gets 20! i thought the newer engines would be better????
 
  #4  
Old 04-14-2011, 11:59 PM
Pkupman82's Avatar
Pkupman82
Pkupman82 is offline
Postmaster
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Muskegon, MI (home)
Posts: 3,441
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
I think that is what my little brother's 02 Ranger Edge gets, it's the super cab 2wd 3.0/ auto. What is the gear ratio in your rear axle? My brother has 4.10s in his truck, gearing does play a pretty big factor in fuel economy. I have heard of the 2.9 being famous for great gas mileage, especially with a manual trans.
John
 
  #5  
Old 04-15-2011, 08:06 AM
grandmas77f150's Avatar
grandmas77f150
grandmas77f150 is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Jackson, MO
Posts: 1,017
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
That's about right. On long trips I get about 20-22
 
  #6  
Old 04-15-2011, 08:12 AM
smalltrucker's Avatar
smalltrucker
smalltrucker is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Amherst, WI
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by grandmas77f150
That's about right. On long trips I get about 20-22
Same here with a '03' 3.0L Auto in a Ext cab, 3.73 gears. About the same I was getting with the '05' 4.0L 4x4 manual w/4.10's. The 3.0's never know to be mileage champs.
Dave
 
  #7  
Old 04-15-2011, 09:47 AM
john72ss's Avatar
john72ss
john72ss is offline
Mountain Pass
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: southwest washington (th
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 3 Posts
i dont know what the rear end gears are but at 60 mph in overdrive the tach shows about 2100 rpm
 
  #8  
Old 04-15-2011, 10:19 AM
grandmas77f150's Avatar
grandmas77f150
grandmas77f150 is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Jackson, MO
Posts: 1,017
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
To answer your plug question. Just get motorcraft replacements
 
  #9  
Old 04-15-2011, 01:45 PM
Rangerman Stan's Avatar
Rangerman Stan
Rangerman Stan is offline
Elder User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I second that nomination for OEM plugs. They will work the best.
 
  #10  
Old 04-16-2011, 07:10 AM
KhanTyranitar's Avatar
KhanTyranitar
KhanTyranitar is offline
Postmaster
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,432
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Yeah, its about par, the 3.0L is not a new engine. The 3.0L is the Vulcan, which dates back to the 80's and to be honest, has not had any serious internal updates since then, it is still a cast iron block pushrod engine. It might get better mileage or at least more power had Ford opted to use the 3.0L Duratec in the Ranger, but that would have driven the price tag up.
 
  #11  
Old 04-16-2011, 10:54 PM
racsan's Avatar
racsan
racsan is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: central ohio
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by john72ss
i dont know what the rear end gears are but at 60 mph in overdrive the tach shows about 2100 rpm
sounds like 3.73's i have that gearing and am turning around 2,000 rpm in overdrive @ 55mph. with the 3.0 4.10's would be a better choice, that motor makes its power higher in the rpm range than some of the other ranger engines. my 4.0 at best has gotten 19.5 highway, mostly gets around 17. in town its about 15, and during the winter is 14-15. the 3.0 isnt know for great mpg, but it is known for being a long-life engine.
 
  #12  
Old 04-17-2011, 11:46 AM
smalltrucker's Avatar
smalltrucker
smalltrucker is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Amherst, WI
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I've had both of the 4.0L's in basically the same truck and the new OHC motors do a couple of MPG better, somethink else to think about.
Dave
 
  #13  
Old 04-17-2011, 01:33 PM
99F150's Avatar
99F150
99F150 is offline
Fleet Mechanic
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Sioux Falls SD
Posts: 1,344
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 12 Posts
Originally Posted by racsan
sounds like 3.73's i have that gearing and am turning around 2,000 rpm in overdrive @ 55mph. with the 3.0 4.10's would be a better choice, that motor makes its power higher in the rpm range than some of the other ranger engines. my 4.0 at best has gotten 19.5 highway, mostly gets around 17. in town its about 15, and during the winter is 14-15. the 3.0 isnt know for great mpg, but it is known for being a long-life engine.
I dissagree, In my opinion the 3.0V6 would bennefit from a much higher gear such as a 3.08.

My dad's old 98 Taurus had the 3.0 Vulcan and cruised at lower rpm than his 2000 Ranger 3.0 auto 3.73 gear. Taurus did 25 average with 28 highway and Ranger does 19 average 22 highway. Weight is similar between the two.

I bought a 88 Ranger supercab 4x4 2.9V6 5speed with 3.73 gear new. I got 18 city delivering pizza's and 23 highway at 60mph, 20 average.

My 99 4x2 supercab 2.5 5speed 4.10 gear is not much better overall. I average 22 overall and if weather nice can hit27-28mpg at 60-65mph.
 
  #14  
Old 04-17-2011, 01:42 PM
grandmas77f150's Avatar
grandmas77f150
grandmas77f150 is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Jackson, MO
Posts: 1,017
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by 99F150
I dissagree, In my opinion the 3.0V6 would bennefit from a much higher gear such as a 3.08.

My dad's old 98 Taurus had the 3.0 Vulcan and cruised at lower rpm than his 2000 Ranger 3.0 auto 3.73 gear. Taurus did 25 average with 28 highway and Ranger does 19 average 22 highway. Weight is similar between the two.

I bought a 88 Ranger supercab 4x4 2.9V6 5speed with 3.73 gear new. I got 18 city delivering pizza's and 23 highway at 60mph, 20 average.

My 99 4x2 supercab 2.5 5speed 4.10 gear is not much better overall. I average 22 overall and if weather nice can hit27-28mpg at 60-65mph.
You do realize that car and truck gear ratios aren't equivalent right?
 
  #15  
Old 04-17-2011, 01:53 PM
99F150's Avatar
99F150
99F150 is offline
Fleet Mechanic
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Sioux Falls SD
Posts: 1,344
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 12 Posts
Originally Posted by grandmas77f150
You do realize that car and truck gear ratios aren't equivalent right?
Exactly! that is why I said The Ranger could use a higher rear gear. The Taurus ran at a lower RPM at same speed than the Ranger. I would put $ on a bet if the 3.73 were swapped for a 3.08 the highway MPG would go up.
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: 2002 ranger gets 20 mpg??



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:09 AM.