Howdy, Stranger!

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





Ford Ranger III

1202123252638

Comments

  • arjay1arjay1 Posts: 172
    I have been looking at Rangers here in the St. Louis area and the dealers appear to be selling them at invoice, no questions asked. Some dealers here have a very large inventory of 2001 Rangers, over 100 units.
    I have been quoted an XLT extended cab, 4 door Styleside (flat) with 3.0l V6, air and power for $17,600. That is before the $2,500 rebate. Not a bad truck for $15,000.
  • I have just bought a 2001 Ranger Edge, 3.0 litre, V6 with the 5-speed. It only has 5300 km's on it and it seems to be running great so far. I 've heard that trucks with the 3.0 engine have a tendancy to Ping. What does this mean? Is it a serious problem? Has anyone else heard of any other problems I should be watching for?
  • hciaffahciaffa Posts: 454
    I can't explain what causes the pinging, for that matter Ford can't figure it out either. Most 3.0l suffer from it. You will notice while driving and trying to go up a grade and as you give it some gas you will hear a metallic rattling sound maybe slight or it can get very loud. It usually appears when the engine is under load. Some owners report that after getting the truck it runs great then after about 6 months the pinging starts and some never get it. Mine started about a year after I bought it. To try and cure it I went from 87 octane to 89 and and higher to see which worked and I settled in at 89 which helped. severe pinging can actually damage the engine because the spark is pre-igniting the fuel. Ford has issued several TSBs on this, the latest from what I gather is TSB #00-07-03 in which they replace the ignition coil and pcm (I think thats a computer reprogram). For some owners it worked and ohters it didn't. On mine after trying the 89 octane I went back to 87 and after a few tankfulls and some pinging I disconnected the negative terminal on the battery for about an hour then reconnected it. This clears the computer and then after driving around as i usually drive it reprograms the computer. The pinging was still there but not as bad and so back to 89 and its runs pretty decent with almost no pinging. Well I have been a little long in the message but I hope it helped.
  • Ford says the 3.0l has been revised for 2002. Edmunds shows a 4 peak HP and 5 Peak Torque drop at the same RPM levels. Towing capacity remains the same, but MPG looks to have increased.

    Also how's the new (for 2001) 2.3l 4 cylinder performing for any new owners? Looks like a good improvement from the 2.5 or older 2.3l on paper...
  • eharri3eharri3 Posts: 645
    Being replaced with a 5 cyl.?
  • I have the 2.3 in my 2001 Regular cab flareside and love it. The gas mileage in the city is averaging just over 24mpg. I haven't had it on the highway enough to get a fuel mileage reading. I have just over 3750 miles on the truck. Luv it!!
  • pro02pro02 Posts: 19
    jdbishop - does your 2.3 flareside have auto or manual tranny?
  • mjbwrtrmjbwrtr Posts: 172
    i just bought a 2000 ranger xlt with the 2.5 and auto, cd player, bucket seats, etc. would have gone with the V6 but i needed the mileage of the 4. so i am a new member of this forum...after being in the "older s-10" forum for quite a while.
    does anyone know of a website where i can punch in my truck's VIN number and find out what gearing it has in the rear end? i am very curious.
    thanks.
  • eharri3eharri3 Posts: 645
    IT should tell you there on that tag where it also tells things like payload and tire pressure.
  • mjbwrtrmjbwrtr Posts: 172
    all it says is "rear 87" whatever that means. now i have to find out with the 87 code is for, the 3.73 or the 4.10.
  • My 2.3 is MTX.
  • mjbwrtrmjbwrtr Posts: 172
    i was driving down the highway tonight and i remembered that someone told me to shift to neutral in my automatic Ranger to get better mileage. i wanted to see if there was truth to it so i shifted. well...the gearshift slipped past "N" into REVERSE. the truck made a "wham" noise and acted as if it had hit a bump, in the split second it took me to return to "drive."
    no strange noises since and no problems. i am sure someone, somewhere else, has done this before...any advice? i am under warranty...should i take it into the service department on monday and admit what a retard i am?
  • I see that edmunds has a 2002 Edge supercab 4x4 w/ a 3.0L manual 5spd. Cannot get this configuration on the Ford site. Do you think this is an error? I can only get a 4.0L option w/ the 4x4 supercab on the ford site. Also, does the Edge (4x4 supercab) HAVE to come with auto trans? thanks for replies. I would love to know if ANYONE out there has a new Edge or XLT with this setup.
  • danny25danny25 Posts: 119
    I know the 4.0 L only comes with an auto.
  • jewels--->I use www.forddirect.com, and this site indeed lists a 3.0l 4x4 in Regular cab only. Don't know I'll look up the brochure and see if it's on there...

    danny--->The 4.0l predominately comes with the 5 speed auto, yet the FX4 and this 4WD Supercab still carry the manual transmission.

    mjbtrtr--->Probably didn't do much, but I wouldn't do that again... :) Besides you're gonna slow down pretty fast in neutral.
  • cage3cage3 Posts: 1
    For 2 yrs now this engine will not run at the proper temp. The temp gauge flags while driving, but
    never overheats. The gauge stays on cold side. Have replaced thermo, the 2 sending units on
    frt of intake manifold. Also when cold a/c air is on the air is blowing on my throttle foot. When
    I,m saying flagging you watch the temp gauge go up and down while driving. Ray C.
  • flushing the entire coolant system, radiator, pump. After that many years and miles there is no doubt some scale built up, and possibly some rust or just plain blockage. When I replaced my radiator last year, I swear the old one weighted at least twice as much as the new one, fully drained too. Also check the electric fan and be sure it's still functioning properly. I wouldn't be too worried because it's not overheating.
  • mjbwrtrmjbwrtr Posts: 172
    thanks, i was really worried i broke something!
    it seems to shift fine and no noises or anything. another question for you: my brother drives a 1989 F-150 and was stuck in some mud today. i hooked my ranger up to it with a rope, thinking that even though it wouldnt jerk it right out, it would certainly pull harder than i could by standing behind the truck and pushing with my body. so i put it in first gear and accelerated slowly, but the rope simply broke since the f-150 was buried. my question is, if the rope had held, and since my towing limit is 2,000 pounds, could i have hurt my tranny/engine? i would think so but i am curious. i want this truck to last a long while and if i keep this rate up who knows...lol
  • I'm no expert at this, but seems logical the engine wouldn't have been hurt, unless you were really bogging it down, and/or revving it high. The transmission probably would take any brunt of any damage, if it was a drawn out event. But the biggest problem was the weight of the F-150. With a couple of heavy duty tow straps, or maybe a winch you probably could of gotten his truck free. Best thing to do would of gotten another buddy with a truck and have both pull at the same time to share the weight(and not using a rope).

    Maybe one of the off-road guys will come to this forum and can explain better.
  • mjbwrtrmjbwrtr Posts: 172
    maybe you can shed some light on this. i have often wondered how companies like Ford or Chevy manage their parts, in relation to their product line. for instance, it seems like a waste of money to create a new tranny for each engine. for instance, would my tranny on the 2.5 liter be the same on on the 3.0, which has a higher towing capacity? why wouldnt they just make one heavier one and let both engines share it? i understand that the 4.0 liter needs a heavier one, and also a 5-speed auto as opposed to a 4, but the others should be interchangeable, right?
  • Basically it boils down to bell housing bolt patterns and torque ratings. I had a friend at a parts store who took a 5 speed, 4 cylinder mustand (1990ish) and put a 302 on it. The transmission was kept original. Last I know he was still running around town with no backseat, and loud [non-permissible content removed] mufflers and the common cheap bolt ons. The transmission survived,(unknown how long) but for the time I kept in contact it worked fine. I bet that trans and rear end were receiving major abuse, and doubt they would last over a couple of years, but it did work then. Automatics are a different story. They have different stall speeds, different gearing, that one would probably not want to swap those around.
    Just don't forget that Ford can share parts with Mazda, Lincoln and Mercury, and even Land Rover, Aston Martin, and Jaguar. While those last three aren't as likely, the first ones are. This helps keep the cost down because that 3.0l transmission goes on many other vehicles across the whole Ford corporation. Vice versa, and same for most other engines/trans.
    It would be nice if everyone was interchangable, but for the most part they just won't fit. I could probably rattle off a little something about late 60's bolt patterns, but haven't really had any experience with anything newer. Besides most automatics are computer controlled, it would be just too hard to make your own breed.
    Why not just make them all heavy duty? Probably to keep prices down. By that mark I wish the 2.3l would be the 2.3l SV0 turbo motor from the earlier mustangs, but again, cost and power curve characteristics would probably not benefit the compact truck.
    Also the 5 speed auto wasn't introduced because it was required, but more to help out gas milage with that extra final gear. Pretty cool that it is available, but I still prefer a stick in a truck.

    Where's Modvptnl? He probably know more about this than me...
  • mjbwrtrmjbwrtr Posts: 172
    i know this has been discussed before but i want to know specifics to the ranger so here goes. i have the 2.5 liter four cylinder. i want to get it to a total of 130 horsepower. its has 119 stock, and i added a K&N filter. will remvoing the snorkle/air silencer make it run better or have more power, and will it void my warranty? any other performance tips which can help?
  • boaz47boaz47 Posts: 2,749
    putting on a cold air k&N intake and a Throttle body spacer. Should increase mid to top end horsepower but not torque. Add a Cat back exhaust system and you should be pushing your desired HP rating. A street legal Header system wouldn't hurt either. Do all three and you might see a bit more than a 11 HP bump. In any case it will feel stronger.
  • mjbwrtrmjbwrtr Posts: 172
    but where do i start? how much $$? and will it affect warranty or mileage?
  • Your warranty will be not be in affect if the part that failed is not a Ford Oringinal Equipment or if non-original equipment part caused the original part to fail. That's why it pays to know your dealership well. Bring donuts, become a good friend...

    Good thing about removing the snorkle and replacing the air filter is that it can be undone in under 10-15 minutes. No warranty to worry about there. Also invest in premium spark plugs and spark wires. I'm sure you could do a little internet searching for many other ideas...
  • mjbwrtrmjbwrtr Posts: 172
    what the heck is it? also, i have heard that the hotter plugs dont do much, and that the premium wires arent really an upgrade. any thoughts?
  • That long tube infront of the air filter housing. It's designed for silencing the intake noise, and lower the sound ouput of the engine. But it also restricts incoming airflow. If you're really want to improve things, you can make a cold air induction yourself. All you got to do is have a tube that runs from the airbox intake to somewhere where cold outside wind can get to it. You can even get a little ram air effect if you do it right. Just do what you can to help the engine breathe and burn better. Every little bit will eventually add to the grin on your face.

    Better wires and plugs just ensure the best spark is produced from the coil pack. I'm not so crazy about going hotter, as much as going to Iridium or platinum. It's an expensive initial investment, but will last a looooong time.

    It's all about the little details. If you bang the garbage out your air filter every oil change, occasionally use injector cleaner or oil additives (I recommend zmax), then your engine will run strong for many years. That's why my 1993 2.3l has reached 138k miles and the valve cover has yet to come off once.
  • Does anyone have accurate EPA mileages? What is the claimed is what is your actual? thanks.

    jewels
  • frey44frey44 Posts: 230
    I have a 00 Ranger 4x4 XLT 4.0 with 5 speed auto. It has an ARE cap and 15 inch Michelins 235's. It consistently gets 17 mpg in my "mixed" driving". The best I have done is about 20 to 20.5 at a steady 60 to 65. The worst is about 14 to 14.5 (i.e. lousy) in cold weather around town . It has the 3.73 rearend. At 70 to 75, the MPG drops to about 18.5. This is all pretty typical. If this truck was 6 inches lower it would probably get another .5 MPG. You can do better with an F 150 or a Siverado LS 2x4. My neighbor gets about 1 mpg BETTER with his 99 F-150, small V8, auto XLT extended cab 2x4. Pushrod 4.0 Rangers are gas hogs for their size [that 4.0 engine is not very efficient and is an old design..however, rleiable and strong]. The 3.0 "pinger" is better on gas, but you have to put up with the snap, crackle and pop. As I have said before, if this truck didn't vibrate me to death at highway speeds, I would LOVE it. The engine is great and I like the ergonomics of the cab very much. I like the seats, inspite of the complaints about them (I am 5ft8 and 150 lbs, so these seats aren't made for big guys).
  • mjbwrtrmjbwrtr Posts: 172
    i knew that the 2.3 liter was a twin plug setup, and i knew my 2.5 liter is a close relation to the 2.3, but when i popped open the hood i was dismayed to see "plugs, plugs everywhere." lol
    so my questions are:
    why in the hell do we need twice as many plugs as usual?
    why did they see the need to move that idea to the 2.5?
    and finally, does having 8 plugs help me? does it get better mileage, more power?
This discussion has been closed.