4.0 Ohv
Thread Starter
|
New User
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
From: taos
4.0 Ohv
Can any one tell me what the service life ( total miles) I could expect to get out of a well maintained 4.0l ohv (99) motor. Are they good for say 200,000 miles. I'm looking at a used truck and I'm wondering if 67,000 miles it has on it would be considerd high mileage for this engine?
Posting Guru
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,984
Likes: 2
Ice, I'd consider 67K low mileage. Mine only has 45K so I can't speak from experience, but from what I hear they will indeed go 200K easily. The early engines had oiling problems with the pushrod ends/rocker arms, but this may have been solved on the later ones. Regardless, the 4.0 ohv is one tough Ford engine.
Elder User
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 692
Likes: 0
My well maintained 2.6L has over 250K miles on it,
why wouldn't your 4.0L get even more? You need
to consider that oil has improved in the last 30 odd
years, so has engine technology, mainly in fuel and
emissions management, which helps with the oil, as
it tends to maintain a better lubricity than the old
crap from the "good old days", which weren't *that*
good...
why wouldn't your 4.0L get even more? You need
to consider that oil has improved in the last 30 odd
years, so has engine technology, mainly in fuel and
emissions management, which helps with the oil, as
it tends to maintain a better lubricity than the old
crap from the "good old days", which weren't *that*
good...
Posting Guru
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,978
Likes: 1
From: Alvin, Texas.
Like Ice said,
Technology has come a LONG way as of late, so even if that 4.0L had another 100k on it, if the rest of the truck was in good shape, I'd still take the truck.
My 2.3L has nearly 230k on it now. I would have been scared away by that figure a few years back....but it's a LOT easier to deal with than my old carb, solid cam, Isuzu truck. None of that carb tweaking every few days and adjusting valves every so often either!
Engines that have been sitting aren't good. When someone gives you the "Grandma barely drove it and it was babied"....I'd stay away from those! Seals rot when an engine sits....run it and things are fine.
Technology has come a LONG way as of late, so even if that 4.0L had another 100k on it, if the rest of the truck was in good shape, I'd still take the truck.
My 2.3L has nearly 230k on it now. I would have been scared away by that figure a few years back....but it's a LOT easier to deal with than my old carb, solid cam, Isuzu truck. None of that carb tweaking every few days and adjusting valves every so often either!
Engines that have been sitting aren't good. When someone gives you the "Grandma barely drove it and it was babied"....I'd stay away from those! Seals rot when an engine sits....run it and things are fine.
Senior User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
From: cincinnati hamilton
i have 193 thou. on my 4.0 in my ford aerostar. many of these vans exceed 200 thou. miles. i know i'm planning to. theengine is original, no major work done on it. only water pump replaced at 180 thou miles. rick 
New User
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
From: Puget Sound WA
Trending Topics
New User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
well, all you guys have had good luck and i am glad. personally, you couldn't give me another stinking 4.0. Mine has 79000 on it and the cam chain to the left overhead cam has busted a hole in my valve cover because of a $7 tensioner called a cassette and ford said "oh well, you need a new short block because of the metal particles it have probably been deposited into the oil" They know about the problem and there is a tech bullitin about it that tells what to do to to fix it but it will cost you $3000. If you decide to fix it yourself, you must dismantle the entire front of the engine and hope the one in the back that turns the right camshaft don't do it to you later where you have to pull the engine to fix. Ford will replace the timing chain tensioner free but that will not help this problem. This engine was maintained well beyond the recomendations of the manufacturer and is setting dead in my front yard now. If you know of any way to make ford fix this manufactures engineering screw up, please let me know.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
2027 Super Duty Carhartt Package First Look: 12 Things You NEED to Know!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Most Surprising 2026 Ford Truck Features!
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 Ford Trucks Coming to Mecum Indy 2026
Brett Foote
5 Best / 5 Worst Ford Truck Wheels of All Time
Joe Kucinski
New User
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
SMAYBERY...
Bet 10 to 1 you have the SOHC 4.0L (ie... the biggest POS Ford ever engineered shy of the Pinto) The OHV engine is great actually started life as the 2.9 in the early Rangers that you could easily expect 200+k miles out of...
If its an early engine Rocker Arms/Pushrods can be an issue if not well maintained but this is a $100 fix for 100k miles...
Bet 10 to 1 you have the SOHC 4.0L (ie... the biggest POS Ford ever engineered shy of the Pinto) The OHV engine is great actually started life as the 2.9 in the early Rangers that you could easily expect 200+k miles out of...
If its an early engine Rocker Arms/Pushrods can be an issue if not well maintained but this is a $100 fix for 100k miles...
Freshman User
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
From: Boston
Maybe I missed something here but ICE 9 asked about the 4.0L OHV but then he wrote (99) does this mean it's from a 1999 vehicle? If so I thought Ford stopped making the OHV 4.0L in 1994 & then went to the 4.0 OHC.
The 67K miles jives with 1999 guess & would equal about 13K per year. Also with his concern that 67K is possibly high milage. God knows that a 1994 with 67K miles would be very low milage or a lie.
The 67K miles jives with 1999 guess & would equal about 13K per year. Also with his concern that 67K is possibly high milage. God knows that a 1994 with 67K miles would be very low milage or a lie.
Tuned
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 343
Likes: 30
From: Maryville, TN
My 98 Ranger has a 4.0L OHV. Made it to 125k miles and the crank busted for no apparent reason right behind the harmonic balancer. I talked to 3 different engine shops, none had ever seen or heard of anything like it before so I would say it is a one off, probably a flaw in the casting.
.
Rather than rebuild I replaced it with a 4.0L OHV from a 99 Explorer that had 50k miles on it for $450.
.
Jon-VH, I don't recall when the OHC engine started in which models but I can garrantee you that the my 98 Ranger and 99 Explorer engines are both OHV.
Bob
.
Rather than rebuild I replaced it with a 4.0L OHV from a 99 Explorer that had 50k miles on it for $450.
.
Jon-VH, I don't recall when the OHC engine started in which models but I can garrantee you that the my 98 Ranger and 99 Explorer engines are both OHV.
Bob
Posting Guru
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,984
Likes: 2
Ford discontinued the 4.0 OHV engine in the Explorer in 2000. I have one of the last ones built. Don't know about the Ranger, but I suspect that they were all changed to the SOHC in 2001 also.
Bob, your crank breakage is not unique.....Unfortunately.......and they all break right behind the harmonic balancer. I've never been able to find a satisfactory answer as to why. One theory is that the tolerance buildup is too tight during manufacture. (They use a +1/-1 specification when assembling the crank and bearings, and some engines wind up with not enough clearance for an oil film. This scores the crank and it eventually breaks.) There is no warning, it just snaps in two.
This theory may or may not be true, but there's enough cranks being broken to make me worry about mine. I don't like driving a vehicle that may self-destruct at any time......
Bob, your crank breakage is not unique.....Unfortunately.......and they all break right behind the harmonic balancer. I've never been able to find a satisfactory answer as to why. One theory is that the tolerance buildup is too tight during manufacture. (They use a +1/-1 specification when assembling the crank and bearings, and some engines wind up with not enough clearance for an oil film. This scores the crank and it eventually breaks.) There is no warning, it just snaps in two.
This theory may or may not be true, but there's enough cranks being broken to make me worry about mine. I don't like driving a vehicle that may self-destruct at any time......
Junior User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
my 2000 ranger has the 4.0 OHV. they changed from OHV to OHC when they restyled the ranger in 2001. personally i think that was a BIG mistake cause I always hear about people having problems with the new 4.0 OHC engine.
Junior User
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
I have 156 thou on my 95 explorer and runs like a top. My dad has an aerostar van with over 340000 yeah 340 000 kms
lol. It runs so good the body panels almost fall off. (it could be that or just all the rust doin that lol)
lol. It runs so good the body panels almost fall off. (it could be that or just all the rust doin that lol)