I am looking for a small pickup for a pest control business. It will haul the spray equipment including 50 gallon tank, small engine and misc. supplies. Which engine would be most suitable for this kind of work load? I would prefer a truck that gets good fuel economy....would the 4 cylinder in an automatic transmission work?

 

I normally recommended the 3.0L V6 in that type of application with an Automatic. Gets the same gas mileage (17/22) as the 4cyl, only marginally more money. FWIW, that's how Terminix spec's theirs.

 

Thank you for the information. Greatly appreciated!

 

The 3.0 is a great choice for a 2wd Ranger. It will offer decent power and good mileage. The 2.3 is not bad as far as 4cyls go, but if there is much highway travel, may be a bit inadequate. Either one will work, the 4 cylinder getting the better mileage, and the 3.0 offering a bit more grunt.

 

You can get a tacoma. It feels like it has no power in auto, but gets good mileage.

 

Gets a whopping 1 mpg more, costs thousands more, and has a JD powers 3 yr service history slightly lower than a Ranger. go figure.

 

Get anything but the 3.slow I have one and can testify that it is slowwwww.

 

Does the 4 cylinder really get the same gas mileage as the 3.0?

 

I won't be doing much freeway driving. The main concern I have is the weight of the spray equipment in the back. My guess is about 500 lbs.

 

[QUOTE=BVFD1983]Get anything but the 3.slow I have one and can testify that it is slow
You say the 3.0 is slow. Have you tried the 4 cylinder for comparison? On paper the 3.0 is supposed to have more power. Are you comparing to a full-size pickup?

 

the 4-cylinder DOES NOT get the same mpg figures as the 3.0L. The inline 4 is rated for 23-27? While the 3.0L might get 20-22 tops. I drove a 3.0L with auto at one time and it got about 20 mpg with mixed driveing, which isn't bad but the 4-cylinder gets much better. Really 500lbs shouldn't be a problem if your just gonna be cruiseing around town. But hey do a test drive of each and decide from there. If mpg is your concern (which would be mine) i'd go for the inline 4. Atleast with a 5-speed manual the 4 cylinder really isn't bad. Haven't driven the auto version but it's got the same number of gears. By the way with 5-speed manual the 4-cylinder is rated for 24-29mpg. Oh yeah by the way, I felt that the 3.0L had decent punch to it, even if you might have to let it rev.

 

I double checked the epa figures on the 2.3 vs. the 3.0 with an automatic- they're identical (figures in my original post).

 

Actaually Polarbear, the 2.3 is rated as high as 24/29 in a Reg. Cab, short box, where the 3.0 tops out at 18/22, all from Fords site, also the 2.3 gets only 5 less HP than the 3.0, although it is down on torque, but the 4 cylinder is also lighter, so I would imagine performance to be very similar, with the 3.0 having an edge loaded down. 500 lbs is not a huge load, so I would say that the 2.3 is more than adequate in this situation. I agree with Fordtastic, do a test drive of both. We can sit here and spit out numbers all day, but it will never give a feel of what each motor is actually like.

 

Aren't EPA formulas great? Anyone else aware that there's a pretty complex formula the EPA uses to come up with those numbers, including typical option content and GWR? At any rate, the short box (not the one I spec'd) comes in as mentioned:
24/29 5spd 4cyl 22/26 AT 4cyl
18/23 5spd 6cyl 18/22 AT 6cyl

The long box, though, scores completely differently- 17/22 with an AT, regardless of engine. Go figure. I would make the argument that these numbers more accurately reflect real-world driving, since the short box is content-limited specifically for EPA purposes. A ringer, in other words. (Ford's not alone in this, BTW)

In comparing the 4 cyl vs. the 3.0 in real world driving, I think the choice is pretty simple- the 4 cyl's torque curve is better suited to a manual transmission, the V6 works better with an Automatic. With that in mind, I'd say the transmission choice should really drive the choice of engine.

FWIW, those long-box Rangers are tough to find (they're typically ordered for commercial users), but they're well suited for the business Craig mentioned he was going to use it for.

 

for mileage and power i would recommend a canyon or colorado. even the i6 version of their engines makes 275 hp and gets 27 mpg on the highway. the i5 (the biggest engine available) still makes 220 hp. a dakota will have the best power but the least mileage. the ranger is kind of at the bottom. enginewise anyways. but i still like everything else on the ranger better. if it just had that the gm i5 or i6...