The 3.0 Vulcan could be one of the last cast iron block and heads motors. Almost everything has an overhead cam and/or aluminum heads.

I have one with an automatic behind it. The motor does labor way more than it should. 150hp isn't enough to move one of these 4wd Rangers well.

Just for comparsion, you might want to try looking at a 3.0 with a manual transmission.

Still, a 2wd with the 4-cylinder and a stick is going to be MPG champ for sure.

 

I have on 02 2WD 4.0 extended cab. I get 20-22 MPG regularly, I drive a 40 mile commute everyday. All things considered, I am glad I got the 4.0 due to extended capbilities. I might get 28 with a 4cyl, but I would never be able to do anything but commute.

 

I feel my 3.0 has all the power I need. I don't have any special requirements, I don't tow or haul anything, and with the manual shift I feel I have better control of the HP. And the maintenance is nil. I think I got lucky to find this truck with the configuration it has.
Pat

 

I'm always intrigued by the knocks the 4-banger gets for its lack of power. I know mine has only 100 hp, but, with a manual 5 speed and using the gears, it does everything I ask of it. Of course, you understand, I don't try peeling rubber going off when the light turns green but I do keep up with traffic well.

 

I am finding a lot of things that are specific to 98-00 (I think those are the right years). Its kinda an oddball set of years, everything before then is the same, everything after is the same. For example, replacement tranny for my truck would have had to be ONLY 98-00, ONLY 4wd, ONLY 3.0. Could not find one. They make aftermarket stuff and leave those years out.

 

I have a 2004, with 3.0 I purchased new, it now has 53000 miles, no problems. I have never used it for heavy loads or towing. Just for driving to work. Good Luck with your ranger search.

 

I might as well toss in. I just picked up a 2002 3.0 auto trans Edge Stepside last weekend, 40 K miles, A couple fillups, all highway. 20.8, 20.0 MPG. not great, but about 10% better than the F150 I sold. I wish it was the 4 cyl 5 speed, but its a nice clean truck at a price I couldn't pass up.

 

I picked up the 08 Sport 4.0 last week (it was time to retire my 215,000+ mile 90 Subaru). I have a 60 mile commute (30 each way). There is no way I could drive my 89 F250 to work, I'd go broke (460/7.5L).

I totally agree with 'jokerforever', you have to drive the 4.0 with a light foot. I set the cruise to 55 and kick back and relax. I haven't made any MPG calculations yet, we'll see (takes me just under 1/8 of a tank one way). I hate to judge the MPG while it's so new. The power is nice however when/if I need it.

Oops, sorry, I seemed to have rambled on about about MPG too much.

I haven't heard any logic-based negative comments on any year of the Ranger. Their good solid light trucks. Just like with any used vehicle, make sure it's been taken care of and not neglected or ragged on.

 

i just traded a 94 ranger in that had 238000 on it with a 3.0. never put one dime in that motor except for plugs and wires. just tell me how you beat that? i bought another 3.0 ranger 10 years newer.

 

[QUOTE=jokerforever;5842658]My two cents:


The 3.0 is a rock solid motor that will last like a diesel but, as I've heard it described before, it will give you four cylinder performance with 4.0 gas mileage.



I've got to agree with this. I believe the advice on using either the 4.0 for power or the 2.3 for economy is reasonable. The 3.0 might be dependable but she's no powerhouse like the 4.0 and she's no economy champ like the 2.3. My buddy has a 4.0 and gets as good of gas mileage as I do with my 3.0. Guess which one I'd really rather have! (hint: it's not the 3.0). I know there's as many opinions on mileage and engines as there are vehicles so this is just my experience.

 

I have a 2002 3.0 that I bought not too long ago. It's an extended cab XLT 2wd 5-speed. It had a matching topper when I got it, and has 117,000 miles to date. My previous vehicle was a Mazda MX-3 with the V6, and going to this ranger, I wouldn't say it had a lack of power by any means. I'm sure if I had a 4wd truck, I'd want the 4.0 but this 3.0 is about perfect. The mileage isn't THAT great, but from what I have seen the engine is pretty much impossible to kill, and I'm getting ~20-21mpg mixed city/hwy driving, with a couple tires that have to be filled about every 2-3 days. So I know when they're replaced, I'll get better mileage due to proper tire pressure and more even wear.

All I use mine for is hauling my r/c airplanes and helis, as well as cars/trucks to the flying fields and race tracks. It's really perfect for what I wanted. I'm even happy with the power. Next time around, I think I'll go for a 4wd 4.0L just for the snow performance if nothing else.
-Eric

 

Not trying to pull teath but I believe the Duratec 2.3L (not to be confused with the Lima 2.3L and Lima 2.5L) is the newest 4 cyl motor.
Introduced around 2001. It was later in 2003 put into the Focus and has ben used in the Ranger and Focus(certian models only) to this day with the exception of Ford dropping it from the Focus line in 2008.

 

No doubt that the Ranger with a 4 banger, with the 5 spd manual tranny will be the mpg champ, but be prepaired to "row" if you live in hilly country, or will haul or tow with it, or it's really windy where you live.

I have a 99, 4dr supercab, with the pushrod 4.0L Cologne & a 5 spd auto with a 3.55 differential, that'll turn out 24.8 mpg highway, running between 55-70 mpg, in mixed hills & rolling terrain.

The pushrod 4.0L engine was dropped for the thistier, but higher HP SOHC 4.0L in 01. Both made about the same torque though.

As has been said, the 4.0L with it's extra thrust, is more fun to drive, but equipped & driven right, it won't cost that much more to operate.

So maybe if you run across a decent 99, or 00 with a 4.0L & a 5spd manual, or 5spd auto tranny, don't discount it out of hand, as it too can turn out decent mpg.

Now on the manual tranny, be sure to check it's rubber seal plugs on the side of the case, for leaking/weeping fluid & be sure to check the fluid level & condition BEFORE you buy it, just in case it's been run while low on fluid.

If it checks out ok, but the seals show wet/weep signs, replace the plugs & fluid & you should be good to go.

Just a bunch more thoughts for consideration.
Let us know what you find & finally decide on & how it does.

 

The only two I know to try and avoid would be the 01-02 4.0 sohc that have the weak timming chain tensionors and the 98-2000 4x4's with the pulse vacume hubs. The hubs can be replaced with manual hubs for around 100 bucks, thats no biggy, but the timming chain tensionors is a lot more involving. The only thing with the old lima 4 cylinder used up till 01 is to make sure your timming belt is up to snuff, it should be changed out every 100,000 miles or so. There is really nothing major to avoid in any of the years except for the tensionors in the 4.0 and that may have been done. They rattle like crazy if there bad, so you would know it.