I've had two Ford Ranger 4 bangers in the last ten years. Loved both of em. They were great for hauling my small boats (under 1,000 lbs.) etc. However, they were both a little weak on power and acceleration for everday use. Therefore, I was thinking about a new 6 cly. 3.0L or 4.0L Ranger extra-cab for 2000 with a limited slip 3.55 rear-end. However, this is where the rub comes in. I started researching the 6 cyl. Rangers on the internet and found out some discouraging stories (i.e. on Edmunds, etc.) Apparently the 2000 3.0L is now a hi-octane (ethanol) engine and has ping and gas mileage problems. Also the 4.0L has some valve, piston slap, and gas milage problems. Therefore, from a practical standpoint, I might as well go with a F-150 regular short-bed cab, since the price is almost the same compared to a Ranger X-tra cab. Question: From an engine stanpoint: Should I go with a 4.2L 6 cyl. w/3.55 limited slip rear or go with the 4.6L 8 cyl w/3.08 limited slip rear? Also, which will give the best gas mileage? P.S. Most of my driving is back and forth to work with no load. Except on the weekends.

 

Mr Mike

Your topic on Rangers is so true in that the price and gas milage is so close to the F150 that it seems practicle to purchase the F150.

The F150 is the better choice for the money and for the space you will have over the Ranger. I spent time behind the wheel of both vehicles and the F150 is clearly way ahead of the Rnager for the price. If Ford would cut the Ranger price by $6,000 or so then the narrow cab and lousy gas mileage may seem like a deal.

As for as engines and gears for the F150, keep in mind that the trucks all have overdrive so the gear you get will always have an edge on fuel savings only when unloaded. This applies for unloaded driving.

Once you hitch a boat or haul a load, the gas mileage dips down and the gear ratio in the rear become more important than the fuel concerns as the gears now play a role in the load transfered to the engine. If you try to run the 3:08 ratio loaded, you will lug the engine full time.

To be honest, from the factory the 3:08 will lug the 4.6 empty but it does give the EPA fuel figures required as a standard issue. Do not listen to folks on this combination as it is the absolute minimum performance you will get out of the F150 4.6.

ORDER THE 5.4 WITH 3:55 TRAC-LOC. You get the better transmission with the 5.4 V-8 which is rated the best auto trans todate. This means no troubles and no rebuilt trans for a long time. The overdrive is plenty to overcome the axel ratio and you will get 17 to 20 miles per gallon unloaded on the hwy.

The 4.6 engine is not worth discussing as all stats and owners complain of power lacks and the trans is really only rated to handle passenger car loads.

As for as the V-6, it is as good as the 4.6, and if you dont care about anything but gas mileage, this is the set up for you. Either way, no a lot of power and light duty drive train parts.

Out of all of the above, you need to decide but the best way to be sure you are able to get the most out of either engine is to get the lowest axel ratio (the higer number 3:55) and don't be mislead that this lower gear is going to rob your fuel mileage as it will not, unless you plan on 90 MPH to and from work and drive 5000 every month.

Once you get a F150 keep in mind you will have a larger truck and no doubt you will be hauling or towing heavier loads as you get used to it which all leads back to the foundation to a properly set up vehicle.

 

gsuburban,

The transmissions for 99-00 4.6 and 5.4 are the same 4r70W.

Mr. Mike,

I get the same mileage with my 5.4L 3.73 combo that I did with my 4.6L 3.55 combo.(15 city, 330 miles per tank, 18-19 hwy, 360-370 miles per tank) For me, thats the only way to go. My grandad's 95 ranger with the 3.0L 3.73 gets about 17 city and 19-20 hwy. Not that much better than mine and with a substantial power deficit. I don't think that the 4.2 gets much better than the V-8's, maybe one mile per gallon at the most. Hope this helps! Merry Chrismas ALL!

------------------
99 4x4 SC Lariat 5.4l 3.73 rear, oxford white

 

I guess I should've got the 5.4, I decided on the 4.6 and 3:55 solely based on gas mileage since I comute 90 miles a day to work and back. My mileage is not highway and not city, I guess you could call it back roads driving, but anyway I get 17mpg (370 to390 miles) to a tank, and there's not much difference on the hwy. or in town. I really wanted the 5.4w/3:73's, but was told by a few in the '97 and'98 mods it was tough on gas. I'm not dissappointed with my setup though, plenty enough power and everything is holding up fine even though I tow a 6800# camper, a 4100# boat and haytrailers that I can't even begin to weigh (probably upwards of 10,000#.

------------------
'97 Ford SC 4X4 XLT Off Road pkg., 4.6,A/OD, 3:55, premium sound w/CD chg, Black clct,towing pkg., hvy duty elec. pkg., Bridestone dueler AT's, line X, Flowmaster true duals, chip, K&N air filter, smittybilt stainless nerf bars

 

My 4.2 gets 23-25 MPG consistently on the highway with the 5speed and 308 gears. This talk about the 6 not getting good mileage is not true for everyone. My brother-in-law gets about the same mileage with the same setup but he has the auto.

------------------
'97 XLT Reg. Cab, 4.2V6, 5spd, Superchipped, K&N Air Filter, Lund Deflector, Dash Mat, MagnaFlow Muffler, Hellwig Rear Sway Bar, Edelbrock Shocks, Duraliner, Extang Saber Tonneau, Bell-Tech 2" Rear Drop, Amer. Rac. Atlas Wheels Clad in 275/60/17 Eagle GTII. Likes straightaways, loves twisties.



[This message has been edited by Frank S (edited 12-19-1999).]

 

Mr. Mike
Just my opinion, but I would definetly recommend the 4.6 over the 4.2
Even with a 3.08 rear end it will easily outpreform a high geared 4.2
I did own a 4.2 and my 4.6 /3.08 is much stronger and gets better mileage.
I partly agree with sburban about the 3.08 gear with a 4.6 While it may lack some grunt if heavily loaded in stop and go traffic, I believe that the 3.08 ratio allows you to run loaded up on the highway, with the OD off and have the engine right in its powerband. I get 20 mpg hwy with my 4.6/3.08 and think its a great combo.

 

I can't belive that a Ranger is as expensive as a F150!
For hte same $$ you would be crazy not to get the F150
Remember also the frame,brakes and suspension are MUCH heavier in the F150 than the Ranger.
Resale value is a lot better too.

 

Well they are both the best selling trucks in their categories!

497!

------------------
97 F-150 SC Lariat, Styleside, White over Gold, 4.6L (Windsor), Automatic, 3.55 rear end, electronic 4X4, w/ every option of Lariat and ORP packages except the 17" wheels (I even got the OR decals now!), MOD's so far: K&N air box mod, Gibson Super Truck, clear Bugflector II, Leer TSC 600 hard cover, Bridgestone Dueler OWL ATP 265/75 R-16's, TrailMaster Invader N7 shocks, Smittybilt step bars, Ford moulded mud guards, "White-white" head lamps, Cloud Rider Design's SS Grill and bumper opening "Summer Grill's", Bosch platinum + 4's.

 

For hauling a small boat, go with the 4.6 and the 3:08's. I have to agree with gears - if you have it loaded in stop and go situations it won't have any get up and go. On the freeway, pulling with the OD off works just fine. I also have to say that not all of the 4.6 and 3:08's are a bad combo. I average 18.5 mpg in the summer (a lot less in the cold winter!) and usually run about 425 miles on a tank of gas. For what I do with my truck and what I need, I couldn't justify the extra money for the larger engine or lower gears. It works just fine in about the same role as you are looking to fill. Good luck with whatever your choice is!

------------------
1997 F150 XLT, Flareside Bed, Moonlight Blue, 4x2, SC, Auto, 4.6L, 3:08, Matched cargo cover, Blu Oval reciever hitch plug, 235/70/16 Firestone Wilderness AT's, Sliding rear window, and a big grin!

[This message has been edited by gopher (edited 12-20-1999).]

 

Rangers are expensive. My dad got his for 18k!!! He isnt really a bargin shopper, but its a nice truck. But for 18k you can get a f-150 s/c xlt w/ the 4.2 which is a lot lot better than the ranger engines. BTW he got the 3.0 and a 4X4 so we get almost the same mpg as my 5.4 4X2 f-150.

------------------
1999 Silver F-150 XLT Supercab Triton 5.4L 4X2 3.55 LS class 4 whell ABS/4-W disc

Stuff I did not need but came with it
Class III Towing package
Power driver seat
Remote keyless entry
Free Floor mats :P
Hell of a ride

Mods I hope to do
1. Superchip
2. K&N air filter
3. Gibson Exhuast

Add-ons
1. Bed liner
2. Hard bed cover

All I'll ever need with this bad boy

Will be getting pictures soon
ccr-rules@worldnet.att.net

 

Mr Mike, your dilemma is exactly why Ford has it's product line set up the way it does. An outfitted Ranger overlaps a base F150 an so on. The ladder progresses upward and only the buyer can decide when to get off. If you end up with an Excursion 4x4 with 30,000 lb towing capacity I guess you went too far.
My father has a 99 F150, V6, auto, 3.55LS. It cost alot less than my truck and I can tell the difference but, when I asked him about the acceleration and power of his truck his reply was, "Hunh?". Everyone has different interests and expectations but, I believe the V6 is competent and if going real fast is important to you be prepared to spend alot more.

Best Wishes.

------------------
99 Lariat Normal Cab 2WD 120"WB 5.4 3.55LS Tow
Dark Toreador/Gold Line-X
raoul_oba@hotmail.com
F150's of Virginia
Just cause we're from Virginia don't mean we're(well, you know)

 

Mr.Mike, I think you'll find the 4.6L with 3.55 LS rear the best choice for you. Some will say the 3.08 gears would be fine, but in your post, you mentioned the Rangers were weak on power for everyday driving.

I can only think of two advantages with going the 4.2 V6 route. You save on the initial price of the truck and you save in the long run on fuel. However, depending on your driving style, that savings in fuel can be very small.

You also have to realize the 4.2, as far as I know, is not a Triton engine. Therefore it doesn't have certain things going for it, like fail-safe cooling.

I had a '97 4.6L, 3.55 LS, SC, 4x4, automatic and it was a fun truck to drive. When empty, it had plenty enough acceleration to keep me happy. When towing 5,000+ lbs, it did very well. You knew the weight was back there, but it didn't have any problems staying at the speed limit.

The 4.6L Triton is probably the best engine Ford has. It's got to be the most dependable engine. You hardly hear of any problems with it on this board. I never had a lick of trouble with the 4.6L in two years. Some folks with the 4.2 grumble about the lack of power. Those with the 5.4 have rough idle and piston slap.

Bottom line:

The 4.2L with 3.55 LS rear will be okay in a regular cab short bed. It won't plaster you to the back of your seat, but it will still move that truck with authority and it will tow or carry your small boats without breaking a sweat. It's also a hell of a lot cheaper than if you went with the 4.6L model. Some of the folks have gotten BIG discounts for sticking with the V6.

The 4.6L with 3.08 LS rear will be better and will make a great highway vehicle. In the city, however, I don't think it will give you that neck popping kick that many of us really love. For that, go with the 3.55 LS rear and the stock tires. The 4.6L is a Triton engine, so that's a big plus. It's also a damned smooth and quiet engine. Ford did an excellent job on this particular engine.

The 5.4, which is what I have now, is awesome. It's had a problem with a rough idle, but that's been fixed with help from this message board. This truck gets just about the same mileage as the '97 did. I guess the '99s were more fuel efficient. So far, no piston slap. This 5.4L engine is an awful lot of fun, however, I would still be happy with the 4.6L Triton.