Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Ford Ranger III

meredithmeredith Posts: 578
edited March 23 in Ford
This topic is a continuation of Topic 1165....

Ford Frontier II. Please continue these
discussions here. Thanks!

Front Porch Philosopher
SUV, Pickups, & Aftermarket and Accessories Host
«13456757

Comments

  • xena1axena1a Posts: 286
    Let's get this one started on a positive note... I've had my Mazda B3000 for exactly one year now. Approaching 14K miles and have been very satisfied with the truck so far. No problems to report. It is a 4WD 3.0L ex-cab (4 door) with a manual tranny. I will be leaving for a road trip from AZ to CO on July 1st and expect to get about 23MPG during the hiway portion of the trip. I will be taking the truck out for some aggressive off-road activity while I'm in CO. I'm very much looking forward to my trip and don't expect any problems. I'll let you know how it all turns out...
  • You do not have to agree with me. But allow me to quote the portion of the article from http://www.blueovalnews.com/QUALITY IS JOB 1 - RECALLS, June 15, 2000, verbatim "4.0 liter Explorers and Rangers NOW use plastic intake manifolds, rather than aluminum. The results are amplified engine noise, hissing, and rough idle due to manifold warpage. Lighter and cheaper? Yes. Better? Hardly." This is in response to your opinion on Ford Ranger II #526. "Quality is Job 1" it noway states that Ford 3.0 or 4.0 manifolds are plastic. Its states that steel is being replaced by aluminum in some cases and aluminum is being replaced by plastics."

    It is very clear that it says NOW. Even the author disputes that it is better. I agree with you that plastics are preferable in some applications but I do not believe that in this instance Ford is driven by 'better' but by manufacturing cost. In paragraph 10, it states "Japanese and German auto manufacturers design parts with the life of the vehicle in mind, not the life of the warranty." I am sure it cost them money to lure me to their products, but IMHO Ford have failed to sustain their effort with tangible quality product and responsive franchised dealer service. If you are comfortable and satisfied with their product and services, more power to you. For myself, it is difficult to give second chances when Ford have not demonstrated the ability to provide a quality product, at least during the factory warranty phase. It is just a consumer opinion, I am sure your understanding of plastics is remarkable, but you do not have to brag about your knowledge with plastics, I could care less. I hope you are receiving a fat check from Ford Motor Company for vigorously defending their manufacturing judgment. Ford do not have any noble gesture other than lining their pockets so you can happily write them checks after checks.
    That is, if you do not eventually sue or if they do not face another class action suit because of a defective product (1999 Mustang Cobra). Have you driven OVER a Ford lately?
  • xena1axena1a Posts: 286
    Sorry to hear about the pinging problems with your 3.0L. I have the same engine in my '99 B3000 and did develop some moderate pinging during uphill acceleration at about 4500mi. Fortunately, the pinging in my 3.0L subsided when I switched to a higher octane fuel. It now has 14,000mi and the engine runs strong. I wish you would have had the same experience...
  • superjim2000superjim2000 Posts: 314
    23 highway? Wow. I dont know if your truck is 2 or 4wd but my reg cab S10 with 4.3 and auto gets 22mpg with my lead foot and 26mpg on long trips. Its 2wd.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Posts: 1,611
    "It is very clear that it says NOW. Even the author
    disputes that it is better. I agree with you that
    plastics are preferable in some applications but I
    do not believe that in this instance Ford is driven by 'better' but by manufacturing cost. In
    paragraph 10, it states "Japanese and German auto
    manufacturers design parts with the life of the
    vehicle in mind, not the life of the warranty."

    The Ford 4.0 and 3.0 60 degree V6 engines are a German engineered engine.

    Oops.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Posts: 1,611
    My 99 4.0 4X4 supercab, when totally stock, got 22-23 mpg and once 25 on the highway. One 550 mile trip with about 30 miles of 4X4 off-roading averaged 21.5 mpg. Changing to 31 inch tires dropped my mpg maybe by 2-3 mpg.

    Do not forget to bring a camera. When we go 4 wheeling up Medano will get some nice shots. Perhaps we will swap cameras. I would choose ASA 400 film as the light is sometimes low due to tree cover.
  • xena1axena1a Posts: 286
    Thanks CP. I'm ready to roll. I'll be on the road by 4AM Saturday morning. It's a solid 12hr drive, plus I loose 1hr due to the timezone change. Westcliffe, here I come!!!
  • A friend from the office insisted that if I bought a Ranger, I "have to have the 4.0." I drove the 4.0 and it seemed very harsh and noisy. Knowing that I would probably pull nothing larger than a U-Haul trailer, and even that only rarely, I tried the 3.0. It's much smoother, and I think it'll be easier to live with in the daily (mostly rural two-lane) commute.

    Against the advice of the office know-it-all, I just bought my new 4x2 Supercab 3.0 yesterday. It's an automatic with power pkg and cruise/tilt. Drove it 300 miles to visit my folks (over rolling north Georgia hills) and got 21.6 mpg. Already it looks like a good choice. It's a bit slower than my 97 Civic, but it cruises well and really seems to run better the faster I push it. My back didn't even hurt afterward.

    I had to back-order an under-the-rail liner from the dealer (as part of the deal, btw) since they usually do over-the-rail only. I'll end up installing either a cap or a hard tonneau cover within a few months.

    Thanks to everyone for your comments on the 3.0 engine--I'm looking forward to a couple hundred thousand miles on this one! And no, mine doesn't appear to have a plastic intake manifold--it looks like anodized aluminum to this (untrained) eye.

    Stephen
  • It said Japanese and German manufacturers, it did not say "engineered". So what if the Ford 4.0 and 3.0 60 degree V6 are German engineered, Ford was never German. Oops! You know you are nitpicking just to make a point even if it is a bad one at that. Plastic intake manifolds are on the 4.0 not the 3.0. The Vulcan 3.0L will continue through the 2002 model year Ranger, although some production might spill over into early 2003 models. 2000 will be the last year for the 3.0L FFV Ranger. You drive whatever you want to drive, I could care less but please argue a better point and get your facts straight--considering you know where Ford, the domestic manufacturer engineered their geriatric OHV engines. If these engines where great, Ford would have put a bigger version of these engines on their best selling F150s, not Tritons.
  • barlitzbarlitz Posts: 752
    Whats wrong with the plastic intake manifold.I replaced mine with a K&N fipk and guess what thats plastic,the reason K&N goes with plastic is for reduced heat,I have the 5.4 triton and there's not a thing wrong with it,as a matter of fact www.wards.com rates it one of the worlds best 10 engines.
  • modvptnlmodvptnl Posts: 1,352
    I think your confusing the air intake with an intake manifold. If you hurry up and scribble your post no one will see it!! LOL.
  • barlitzbarlitz Posts: 752
    sorry you are right,for some reason I was thinking about something else.Thanks though, maybe I'll stay out of this topic for a while.:)
  • jcc6jcc6 Posts: 8
    I have had my 2000 Ranger 3.0L for about a month now and haven't had too much of a problem. I do have a few questions about it for those who care to respond:
    1. I have noticed that ~3 to 3.5rpm is the powerband for the 3.0L. I can get sufficient power when passing on single lane highways when I run 3rd gear up to ~4 to 4.5rpm. Will that hurt my engine, even if it is only for a few moments?
  • jcc6jcc6 Posts: 8
    Two other things I have noticed:

    1. When my windshield wipers are on, my engine really loses power. Does this happen to all 3.0L or is my engine faulty?

    2. The safety-belt alarm is driving me nuts! My dealer says that it can't be disconnected....Is he telling the truth?
  • The best way to keep that pesky alarm from dinging all the time is to WEAR THE SEAT BELT. It also does an excellent job of keeping you farther away from those high explosives in the airbag mechanism. So unless you want a punctured aorta next time you hit something, just wear the belt. (It saved my life in 1995.)

    Stephen
  • It shouldn't matter much so long as it's not all the time. My automatic 3.0 kicks down on hills at ca. 60 mph, so I can't see that there's anything wrong with running the manual version at the same rpm for short periods.

    Top-end wear (valves, valve guides, camshaft bearings) would be the major long-term concern, and as long as your oil passages are reasonably clean (from regular oil changes every 3000-5000 miles) there shouldn't be any real danger (assuming the engine is put together properly to begin with. . .)

    Stephen
  • My first guess would be that when your wipers are on, you're also running the defogger, which automatically engages the a/c compressor to dry the air inside the truck. If that's true, then I'd expect a little "drag" on the engine. (I haven't noticed it on mine, but here in Georgia I haven't run it without the a/c since I bought it :-) )

    Other than that, it could be that there's some sort of electrical problem that causes the alternator to run full-time when the wipers are on--maybe a faulty voltage regulator???

    Stephen
  • derekshawnderekshawn Posts: 10
    I currently own a 2000 Ranger ext. cab with the 3.0 but will be selling it to my dad so that I can get something cheaper to take to school with me here in Georgia. I have a friend that is selling a 98 Ranger with 70k miles on it. I know that the mileage is very high but he is offering it for a really good price. What problems should I look for? Is there anything I should be concerning about? Thanks for any info.

    Derek
  • derekshawnderekshawn Posts: 10
    The '98 Ranger has the 2.5L with the automatic tranny. It looks to be in very good shape and the guy who owns it is a mechanic.
  • brewster3brewster3 Posts: 10
    I just changed the fluid in the 5-speed manual transmission in my '99 Ranger 4x4 with 3.0 litre engine. It is the first change since I got the vehicle new. The mileage is 29,930. The vehicle is mostly driven at highway speeds of 65-85 mph for about 45 mile stretches.

    The fluid was BLACK, not brown, or red, but black. It was very thin in consistency, almost watery and had a funny odor. Also there were a lot of metal filings on the magnetic drain plug.

    The fluid in the transfer case was nice and red.

    Anway I put new valvoline ATF in both the tranny and transfer case.

    Any ideas as to why the fluid was BLACK ??? The trans has always shifted fine and is very quiet. The only thing that has me a bit concerned is why was the fluid so BLACK.

    It was so dirty and black that I am going to change the fluid out to sort of flush it again soon. Is there any better fluid that I could be using ???
«13456757
This discussion has been closed.