Hey, come on guys, a relative newcomer to FTE is asking for info on how to make the conversion, not reasons why he should not do it. I think trying a 4bt diesel in a Ranger would be neat. I've wondered about it myself.

Why? Probably because my older brother tried (sucessfully) putting a 4 cyl. Perkins diesel with a turbo out of an Olds F-85 in his equally old Dodge van, backed up by a combination of Ford wide ratio 3 speed and close ratio 4 speed transmissions.

Did it make economic sense? Probably not, but is was a surely neat project.

 

Contrary to Mr. g_k50 comments, I don't think you can just dismiss the 4bt option for the Ranger.

Frankly, I believe tractor_boy has done an awesome job making his Ranger what I'd hope to make mine someday!

Unlike g_k50 claimed 21.4 mpg, my 4.0 Ranger 4X4 XLT has 4.10 gears and driving conservatively, the best mileage I can muster is about 17-18MPG. Making the MPG vs. cost per gallon arguement null and void after very few miles.

Had I known that when I bought it, I'd have bought an F150 as the price differential wasn't all that much.

Mr g_k50 what gears are you running on your Ranger and is it 4X4? It can't be the crappy gas formulation in the northeast that makes me run so much worse is it?

As tractor_boy mentions, why can one engineer on a limited budget figure out how to run a diesel in a small truck, yet all the Ford/GM/Dodge engineers with unlimited budgets cannot?

Tractor_boy's truck is clearly a 4X4 and it sounded like a standard tranny, I'm curious what gear ratio he's running.

I think the bottomline is for a truck, the torque curve and fuel mileage of a diesel will always out perform a similar gas option, as the 3/4 ton and 1 ton big brothers have shown.

I believe the engineers know this, but the marketeers and executives are still smarting from their 1970-1980's failures in diesel sales. They gave the American public garbage and we didn't buy it, so in their mind it's because "diesels don't work in the U.S." To which I say hogwash. Put a "powerstroke" equivalent in a Ranger (and a 4BT is a great start) and they will sell like ice cream in July.

 

There is ample evidence in tractor_boy's posts to conclude that putting a 4BT in a ranger is a bad idea. The problems and expense overweigh the benefits of low end torque and better mileage. It's a simple cost benifit analysis that any sophmore engineering student should be able to calculate.

A non-engineer can simply perform the build and then try to sell the resulting hybrid at a profit.

 

Well your build looked prety good think I will toss it around a little bit there is alot more into it than I originaly thought. Thanks for the information though.

 

There is no diesel Ranger because it would make too much sense. Everywhere else in the world small diesel trucks, namely the Toyota Hilux and the newVW RPU(robust pickup), are found everywhere. The RPU is available in Diesel-Manual trans only. Why have a 4 cyl TD diesel truck here? It would get 25 mpg, could tow 5 or 6k (enough for street rod or 20 ft boat or small camper) and be economical and utilitarian. The problems as I see are the price of diesel here, the diesel stigma the US car buyer still has, lower profit margin of the small trucks, and of course the oil company conspiracy. If american cars and light trucks were 80 diesel as is Europe we'd use millions of gallons less oil per day. Oil companies don't want that. Nor do states like NY that collect (including federal tax) 59.6 cents per gallon on gas and 64.7 cents per gallon on diesel. Plus where I live you pay 8% state and local sales tax on the price of the fuel with excise tax - tax on the tax if you will. Thus diesel cars and small trucks (and hybrids, etc.) are not favorable to broke local governments. /Politics Rant.

Now I have never tried, but 4BT in Ranger problems as I see it:

The 'little' B3.9 is pretty tall and pretty heavy for a Ranger. It must be quite tight to get the hood to close. The IFS on a 2000 is not so great stock so I don't think it would handle the weight of the Cummins.

The axle ratio's on a Ranger are way too low. You either need tall tires or you should have a 2.73 or so axle with stock Ranger tires.

You need a B3.9 from a vehicle application like a P-series step van so it has a vacuum pump and power sterering pump. PS pump is obvious, vacuum pump is needed for brake and HVAC. If you have an engine from a generator or pump or the like it won't have these items and you will need to get them.

Cooling-getting enough radiator in the Ranger grille, especially with an aftercooler and A/C could be tough. I would be concerned about a stock Ranger radiator being enough.

Emissions. I don't know about your state. In NY 96 and newer [gas] vehicles require a plug in inspection to connect the vehicle computer to the DMV. So in NY or a similar state you'd have to either swap VIN tags to title the truck as older than 96 or get your state to change your title from gas to diesel. The title change is probably pricey and time consuming if even possible.

I've thought about the Ranger diesel swap for a long time but it just doesn't seem worth it. The dollars don't add up and as stated the ranger is a small package to work with. I concluded that an older F150 2wd would be a better choice without a huge sacrifice in fuel. The twin I suspension would hold a 4 cyl diesel well (could use F250 springs possibly). A fast F150 rear end from a truck with a non OD trans (like a C6 or T18) would work well with a diesel and OD trans.

Or, if dead set on the Ranger, I think a smaller lighter engine like a TDI VW is a better choice for the Ranger. Plus, if you live in an emissions state like CA you should be OK if the engine is the same year or newer as the truck.

 

Totally agree with you on the reasons compact trucks have no diesel options.

Actually there is more engine to hood clearnace than with the 4.0. After redoing the oil pan sheet metal that is. On 2WD TTB rangers though, it fits without any mods that I did.

I think I agree with you on the newer IFS rangers. Stock suspension is not the strongest.

On the axles. Is that why there are plenty of dodge cummins trucks with 4.10 ratio axles from the factory? I agree your mileage will hurt a little though. Hence one of my next projects is putting in 3.08 gears in place of the 3.73's.

On the cooling system. I have had the stock thin ranger radiator with NO FAN since the end of the swap in January. Truck could idle all afternoon without overheating. Yesterday I hauled close to a ton of firewood up a steep forest service road for several miles at about 15mph. It was around 70 or 80. My temp guage came up to "normal" quicker than usual but held there on its own. I need a fan when I get my A/C up and running though.

Emissions are not my problem. And neither is registration. Others may run into issues there though.

 

Any time you are in my area, I personally invite you to come test drive the ranger. You might change your tune. Everyone I let drive it so far has.

 

6BT in Dodge trucks came with 4.10 or 3.54. 4.10 is more common but 3.54 is preferred by most unless towing a backhoe all the time. Those axles are with a relatively tall 16 inch tire (~29 inches tall) and an overdrive transmission. NV4500 is 0.73:1 and the automatic is an even taller 0.69:1. Early Cummins dodges have a 3 speed auto and 3.07:1 axles.

That's good that it stays cool with the Ranger radiator. Is your truck intercooled?

 

With the new CAFE standards that the manufacturers need to meet by 2016 I cannot see why putting a small diesel in the Ranger and getting 35+ MPG out of it wouldn't make sense.
I'd buy one in a minute.

The new super duties are getting much better fuel mileage that their predicessors. Some are hitting the upper 20's in special circumstances.
It's hard to imagine that a truck that weighs half as much and has a frontal area that much smaller can't achieve 35+ mpg's...

 

ford does put diesels in the rangers outside of the states...they even have crew cab ones...ford probably doesn't see that it is cost effective to do this in the states... go check out ford ranger forums there is even a guy with a twin turbo 6.0l in a ranger, and another one with a dually