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

3.0 vs 4.0 3.0 junk??????

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #16  
Old 12-11-2012, 01:45 PM
grimmj's Avatar
grimmj
grimmj is offline
New User
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by KhanTyranitar
Thats one opinion, and you are certainly entitled to it. I have owned both, I've had more 4.0Ls than 3.0Ls. The 4.0L are solid and bulletproof. Yes, the heads do have a tendency to crack, but only if they have been overheated. The earlier ones more so because the open chamber design used more timing advance, which left more potential to ping or detonate is substandard quality fuel was used or other problems came up like a dirty MAF sensor. The later 4.0L used a closed chamber design that could produce as much or more power with less advance, making it more resistant to that problem. The problem I've seen witht he 3.0L is their tendency to blown head gaskets, even if they've never been overheated. Beyond that, I agree, it is a solid engine. But being reliable is not the only merit an engine needs to have. In this world, fuel economy is a must. The 4.0L has more power and torque, yet can match or nearly match the 3.0L in fuel economy and reliability. The 2.3L produces less power, but gets much better fuel economy. The latest generation Duratecs produces enough power than the 3.0L literally became obsolete, and Ford dropped it front he Ranger. Think about it, why offer an engine that only marginally produces more power than the smallest engine, without being even close to its fuel economy.

Take this however you wish, but the Vulcan 3.0L isn't exactly known to be that great in the Taurus either. Sure they might run for a while if cared for, but there are many other engines that are just as reliable, that produce more power per liter, better fuel economy, smoother broader power curves, etc. Its an antiquated pushrod engine that has long outlived its usefulness.

For the record, which ones you find in the wrecking yards has little to do with their reliability. A lot of it has to do with how many were sold in the first place. Sure you will find lots of 4.0L, its because it was a popular engine option. This also does not tell you why the truck is in the wrecking yard. Most of them are there because of trans failures, not engine failures, if not due to collisions. As the trucks get newer, the 3.0L became more and more unpopular, especially once the 4.0L switched to the 4.0 SOHC, and then the DOHC. Those engine produce so much more power than the 3.0L, which between its original design, to its dying days, only managed to increase its output by a mere 20 hp. This is with all the technology that had been developed. When Ford approached Yamaha about building a high performance head for the Vulcan for use in a planned mid engine sports car back in the 80's, Yamaha engineers determined that it would be too involved to do so, and that they were better off building a new engine for the purpose, which they did. When the Ford mid engine sports car was canned, they decided that since the engine was designed to be used in place of a Vulcan (same bell housing pattern), that they could put in in a Taurus and the Taurus SHO was born.
I joined this forum because of this thread. I know its old, but I hope that I can maybe clear up some things. I am a mechanic, have worked on anything from AMC to Volkswagon, and am now pursuing my degree in Mech Engineering. I have many friends who are also in the industry. One in particular works with an engine machine shop. One works for a Ford dealership here in NC, just down the highway from me. My family still living up north has extensively worked for ford for several generations. Between the several of us (friends, family, and me), we have experience with both engines. I drive a 2.3 Duratec ranger everyday (chain timed, dohc, non-lima). I have been around all engines offered in explorers and rangers (and most engines produced by FoMoCo over the last 30 years or so).

Technically speaking, from an engineers perspective, any modern automobile engine is a marvel of complex engineering and human ingenuity. The 4.0 and 3.0 are both relatively well designed engines that are capable of serving their operators and platforms well, if maintained appropriately. Anything that whirrs along at several thousand rotations per minute, day in and day out for hundreds of thousands of miles, at high temperatures, for perhaps even decades at a time without significant servicing deserves some kind of respect. It really is an amazing thing, how much stress and force that these engines go through on a daily basis.

Anyhow,

There are two 4.0 engines. Cologne 4.0 (until 2000 or so) and Cologne 4.0 SOHC (Started around 1997). I don't like either of them.

The 4.0 SOHC is a challenging engine to rebuild and repair, which also means it is expensive to do so as well (for the average individual). Timing virtually requires Ford special tools, which many folks lack. This is why many are seen in scrapyards; repair cost outweighs net worth of the vehicle, and may not be worth the effort to the owner. I hate working on the SOHC 4.0. I dont touch them anymore. Many individuals opt for a low mileage used engine over having me or my counterparts rebuild theirs due to the time and labor involved.

3.0 VS 4.0 SOHC? I would take the 3.0. If I was forced to pick from those two. In my personal experience, with those who I have dealt with, I see less trouble from them. And the other engine options are relatively easier to work on as far as maintenance/repair goes.

3.0 Vs 4.0? Both have their pros and cons. Either will serve you well is well maintained. The 3.0 isn't a turd like many make it out to be. The 4.0 is also prone to issues.

4.0 vs 4.0 SOHC. Id take the 4.0.

If I were shopping for another ranger, I would buy any 2.3 that has been well kept and not abused.

If I needed power, I would buy a ranger roller and drop in a trusty 5.0.

^Same thing as goes for explorers (with a few other things to consider). But fortunately, explorers have the option of a factory 5.0 (but unfortunately lack the option of the 2.3).

On the topic of economy. Don't expect much out of either. Buy a 2.3 if that's your concern.

Power. The 4.0 wins. But again, the 3.0 has more power than the 2.3.

If you can get a well maintained 3.0 for loads cheaper than a 4.0, do it. Unless the moderate (not enormous) gain in power is worth that much more to you.

Any vehicle, engine, transmission, etc has its tradeoffs. If you want power, go for it. If you want cheap and easy maintenance, go for it. One vehicle may break down more frequently, but may be incredibly easy to work on.

Main thing is, the original poster is doing his/her research. Which is the smartest thing one can do when looking for a vehicle. Just lookout for internet forum folklore. And the info parrots
 
  #17  
Old 12-29-2012, 02:15 PM
Trail Rider II's Avatar
Trail Rider II
Trail Rider II is offline
Senior User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
97, 2wd with manual trans. the trucks odometer quit at 156,000 miles three years ago. I drive 100 miles a day six days a week. I did have to have the heads done last year. So at this point the frontend had had many parts replaced, the hyd clutch slave has been replaces three sets front brakes. four sets of tires. the a/c compressor quit. the heater will cook you.

The 3.0 gets somewhere around 21-24 mph, gas gauge and ode being broken I refuel every third day. Driver seat is all but gone!!!

The heads rebuild and installed was $1200.00 I have not had anymore problems.

Yes the power is not great, dont use any oil.

The little 3.0 just keeps going and going, once in a while I run it up to 75-80 mph, has some kind of drive line vibration. but I haul hay and guts in it and drive it daily.

Great little truck I would buy another one in better shape when I need it.

I figure somewhere around 300,000 miles maybe more!
 
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
biggreentank
1983 - 2012 Ranger & B-Series
12
09-28-2006 05:17 PM
ValkyrieVixen
1983 - 2012 Ranger & B-Series
25
05-24-2006 09:50 PM
dono
1983 - 2012 Ranger & B-Series
13
12-22-2004 08:33 PM
rons94s10
1983 - 2012 Ranger & B-Series
9
10-03-2004 09:14 PM
redranger99
1983 - 2012 Ranger & B-Series
24
06-08-2004 07:21 PM



Quick Reply: 3.0 vs 4.0 3.0 junk??????



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:44 AM.