 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Ford / Ford Trucks / June 2009Ranger 4 Banger ???
I am looking at a new Ford Ranger pickup and was wondering how the 4 cylinder performs? In the past I have been very disappointed with 4 cylinder engines in compact trucks, but have not yet had the opportunity to drive a Ford Ranger with one. > I am looking at a new Ford Ranger pickup and was wondering how the 4 > cylinder performs? In the past I have been very disappointed with 4 > cylinder engines in compact trucks, but have not yet had the opportunity > to drive a Ford Ranger with one. I assume you were disappointed with the performance, correct? Speaking for myself the 2.3 liter Duratec design in the Ford or Mazda 5 speed 2WD truck has plenty enough power. Your expectations for power may be different. The best thing about this engine is it's gas mileage. I regularly get 29 to 31 mpg. The engine design and build quality is regarded as very reliable. >> I am looking at a new Ford Ranger pickup and was wondering how the 4 >> cylinder performs? In the past I have been very disappointed with 4 [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > best thing about this engine is it's gas mileage. I regularly get 29 to 31 > mpg. The engine design and build quality is regarded as very reliable. I do not have a Ranger, but I agree with the suggestion that any 4-banger is better when mated to a manual transmission. I've driven plenty of cars and trucks, and my experience is always that a 4-cyl needs to be in front of a 5-spd. The ONLY exception was a Camry that my carpool partner had. She had both a 6-cyl and a 4-cyl (at different times) and the 4-cyl Camry was a delightful car to drive. Every other 4-cyl that I've driven with an automatic was a gutless wonder. Your mileage may vary. For you comparison ... People I know with a Jeep will tell you that the 4 and the 6 get almost identical mileage, and the 6 is far better for freeway driving. Due to gearing considerations, the 4 and the 6 compare well with one another on the trail, but the highway is where most spend the most time, and those with the 4 are very unhappy with the choice. I have no idea how the Ranger 4 and 6 compare to each other, but I'm almost 100% certain that if your driving style takes you in the direction of an automatic transmission, the 6 is a better choice. If you are good with a manual transmission, then you can definitely shop the motor for performance and economy. >>> I am looking at a new Ford Ranger pickup and was wondering how the 4 >>> cylinder performs? In the past I have been very disappointed with 4 [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > times) and the 4-cyl Camry was a delightful car to drive. Every other > 4-cyl that I've driven with an automatic was a gutless wonder. Hadn't thought of that, although my wife had a Mazda 626 LX with a 4 cylinder automatic that performed pretty well. >>>> I am looking at a new Ford Ranger pickup and was wondering how the 4 >>>> cylinder performs? In the past I have been very disappointed with 4 [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >Hadn't thought of that, although my wife had a Mazda 626 LX with a 4 >cylinder automatic that performed pretty well. Try the current model escape with the 4 cyl and 6 speed auto. Sweet. ;-) >> I am looking at a new Ford Ranger pickup and was wondering how the 4 >> cylinder performs? In the past I have been very disappointed with 4 >> cylinder engines in compact trucks, but have not yet had the opportunity >> to drive a Ford Ranger with one. > > I assume you were disappointed with the performance, correct? Yes. My last one was a 2.2L Sonoma with a standard. Found myself climbing grades (like the mountains on I-8 going into San Diego) with it in 3rd gear and my foot planted firmly on the floor in order to go 45 MPH. > Speaking for myself the 2.3 liter Duratec design in the Ford or Mazda 5 > speed 2WD truck has plenty enough power. Your expectations for power may > be different. The best thing about this engine is it's gas mileage. I > regularly get 29 to 31 mpg. Yeah, the mileage in this day and age gets my attention. > The engine design and build quality is regarded as very reliable. > >> I am looking at a new Ford Ranger pickup and was wondering how the 4 > >> cylinder performs? In the past I have been very disappointed with 4 [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > > The engine design and build quality is regarded as very reliable. Having owned three small trucks with four cylinder engines (all had manual transmisisons) I would have to say that if you are mainly using it for transportation, do not haul very much heavy stuff, and do not have to drive up many steep grades then the four cylinder is fine. I used to tow an 18' boat with my Toyota truck with the 22R engine and it did just fine but I was traveling on pretty flat ground. I never attempted to take it up to a mountain lake or such. I recently bought a Ranger with the 3.0L V6, auto trans. I think it would do much better for towing and hauling than the four cylinder. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.