Ford Ranger

[UmmaGumma]

Anyone have experience towing a big v-hull with teh 4.0 SOHC ranger?<br /><br />I have the 2002 version and am considering getting an Alumacraft 17'11 with a 135 HP Motor. Total weight for boat, trailer, motor is somewhere around 3,000 lbs (Max) loaded with gas and batteries.<br /><br />Should I go smaller on the boat, maybe a smaller engine, or is that weight ok? I have a class III hitch, and from what I have heard my ranger came standard with the tranny cooler. There are a few hills where I live, but it would be once or twice a year where I would have any real "Hills" to transverse (I live in Minnesota). <br /><br />Your opinions count in my book!

 

[DJ]

Re: Ford Ranger

UG,<br /><br />The Ranger will do fine with your load if:<br /><br />You have at least:<br /><br />1. A 3:55 axle ratio. Limited slip preffered.<br />2. 2870 lb. payload package.<br />3. "Super Cooling"<br />4. Have a dealer wire your trailer lights-if you do not have the trailer tow harness already available at the bumper.<br /><br />You're going to do whatever you want anyway, these are just precautions.<br /><br />Be carefull, The length of the tongue on your trailer is important. If you have a heavy tongue weight, Your front axle will lift when backing down a steep ramp. Steering will be effected.<br /><br />I would keep tongue weight under 200 lbs.

 

[6MISFITZ]

Re: Ford Ranger

I don't see your truck having much of a problem pulling your boat and trailer. Boats tow great compared to travel trailers any day.<br /><br />The biggest safety thing with any trailer will be stopping. Make sure that the trailer has brakes and that they are kept in good conditon.<br /> <br />At the end of EVERY year, don't forget to have your transmission serviced. <br /><br />Good luck,<br />Mike.

 

[martinwinte]

Re: Ford Ranger

I tow alot more than that with my ranger (93 4.0 4x4). If you have it, don't pull the boat in O/D. Stopping will be an important issue, trailer brakes are a good idea. Don't ride your brakes and have them checked more often.<br /><br /> If you haven't towed much in the past practice,practice,practice.... Boat ramps can be interesting and backing skills help (ALOT).

 

[Homerr]

Re: Ford Ranger

I have a 2001 4x4 Supercab Ranger (V-6), and I tow my 2001 21 ft. Bayliner all over the place, hills and all. <br />No problems, although a bit more power up the big hills would be nice. I can usually maintain about 40-45mph. up hills. Flat stretch..SLOW DOWN! It will get away from me.<br /><br />H.

 

[dmessy]

Re: Ford Ranger

It'll pull it OK but you'll find that sometimes your boat will be driving the truck. My 3.0 Ranger pulling a 17' Spectrum with 75HP motor was struggling. Had to put a large tranny cooler on it and the brakes wore quickly. Couldn't recommend using your Ranger in this situation.

 

[tltjilek]

Re: Ford Ranger

I had a '94 ranger,4.0L, 4x4, 5-speed w/ O/D, pulled 16' fiberform ('78) with 70hp merc. not any problems till axil on trailer broke. New axil same truck, still no problems. Traded ranger for a little bit bigger. F-250 4x4 diesel. Needed more room for the dog (and wife ). Also planning for newer and bigger boat.

 

[Waterrazor]

Re: Ford Ranger

I have a 94' Ranger 5-Spd. with a 3.0. I was wondering if I could pull my 2300 Lbs. Flats boat out at the ramp? I know that I can tow it but am not too sure about getting out of the ramp!

 

[MGuckin]

Re: Ford Ranger

Waterrazor,<br />The 3.0 is marginal power especially with a manual tranny. Sure it will tow it but I suspect you might smoke the clutch at the ramp if it is steep. Better off with an automatic tranny.<br />Been there done that.

 

[93bronco]

Re: Ford Ranger

i pull an 1802 trophy with my 93 fullsize bronco, would not go with out atleast a surge brake trailer. i get pushed all over and that brake definetly helps. could be cause of the short wheel base. my friend has a jeep cherokee alot better in the towing area. brakes are a must.

 

[MJC]

Re: Ford Ranger

UG - <br />IMHO the Ranger is way too small. I tow roughly the same (3050 lb) with an F250 auto with a 351 and that is about the minimum I would want. Sure wish I had kept one of the diesels I had...........<br />And definietely do not go smaller on the boat - go larger on the tow rig! <br /><br />Good luck.

 

[jasonnb]

Re: Ford Ranger

Waterrzr, I don't thinbk you will have any problems if you use good ramps. I have drug my 2000lb boat out at loose gravel ramps using my '92 Ranger 3.0, 5spd, 3.45 gears. Pulling power isn't an issue. Stopping power is. I have pulled the boat for 2 hour trips through back road hills and interstates. It gets pushed around by the wind a bit and you try hard to avoid quick stops. Stopping can be done, but be very careful. I would highly recommend trailer brakes. If your truck has the 3.73 grears, you should be within your tow rating.<br /><br />MJC, I'm like you that a larger tow vehicle is better, but I also tow a 4,000lb bowrider with my '99 F-150 4.6v8 and find the 150 to be totally sufficient for this load. The boat (302 Ford, 5.0) has a larger displacement engine than the truck 4.6). I wouldn't want to try this load with a Ranger though. 2000lbs is more than enough for mine, but it is an older model that only weigs about 2800lbs to start with. It's a pocket rocket o drive!

 

[araiha]

Re: Ford Ranger

I have read that the 5 speed transmission is not particularly strong and not overly well suited to added loads. <br /><br />The bumper hitch is inadequate as well. A good receiver is a MUST.

 

[Navigator]

Re: Ford Ranger

The weakness in the ranger is not the 5 speed tranny, its the small diameter clutch. Rangers were never designed to pull anything with a manual. If you check their ratings, they usually say about 2k pounds with ALL engines and manuals.<br /><br />That said... On my 93 2wd Ranger 3.0 5 speed, I got around the slugishness by changing the rear end from a 3.54 to a 3.73. The engines spins about 25% faster, but it pulls trailers like a dream. Dont plan on breaking 70, cause 80's about all she'll do. I did the swap when the engine had 40k miles on it. Last week, it rolled to 155k. It didn't hurt the reliability one bit.<br /><br />Nav

 

[jasonnb]

Re: Ford Ranger

Navigator, glad to hear from another satisfies 92' 3.0/5spd owner. Mine just rolled 142k. It still has its 3.45 gears. Uses a bit of oil, but that seems to be the norm for this engine. Shure is fun to drive without the boat!

 

[Navigator]

Re: Ford Ranger

Jasonnb,<br />My Ranger's been good to me, but the tranny is on its last leg. I had a new clutch put in at 90k and a prominant Tampa Ford dealer failed to replace the old clutch bearings when they did the fix. (I wont say who it was because I'm not really into public bad mouthing). Long story short, a mere 15k miles later, the bearings froze, destroyed the clutch and damaged the synchronizing gears in the transmission. The dealer swears they replaced them, but forgot to list the part on the invoice. When is the last time you ever heard a dealer giving you "free" parts? Anyways, I had it rebuilt but the synchronizers have never been the same. I have a difficult time getting 2nd and 3rd, sometimes it binds and I cant get the gear at all. <br />The 3.0 engine on the other hand, has never had a lick of trouble, although mine burns a bit of oil too. I think its a "right of passage". <br />Since I like the way it pulls, I'm considering getting another Engine/Tranny combination. <br />I wonder if the new OHC 4.0 will fit???? 200 plus ponies would be real sweet!<br /><br />Nav

 

[DJ]

Re: Ford Ranger

Navigator,<br /><br />What year is your Ranger? The SOHC 4.0 may or may not fit. The engine compartment and cab got a pretty extensive rework in '01'.<br /><br />The 4.0 OHV definetely will fit. It is a very strong engine (165 hp.) with a lot more torque than the 3.0. It's also very durable.<br /><br />It will require a lot less rewiring and computer mods. that the SOHC 4.0 would.<br /><br />The engine was found in Explorers, Rangers and Aerostars.

 

[jasonnb]

Re: Ford Ranger

I am down to 2 choices when my 3.o gives up someday. A. I can drop in a 302, but that requires a tranny and rear end swap. or B. I can rebuild the little 3.0 to my spec . I think I will go with B as it requires no changes to the driveline. The little 3.0 can be pumped to upwards of 175hp pretty easily and more if you have the time/money. I know of someone who claims to have dynoed' their 98+ 3.0 at 198hp at the wheels.<br /><br />As it is, I will drive it till it dies, patch it back together, and drive it some more. It's been too reliable to mess with until then. On the oil burning, I found that my oil consumption halved when I switched to 10/30 synthetic.

 

[DJ]

Re: Ford Ranger

jasonb, <br /><br />Be careful how much you "pump up" that "Vulcan" 3.0.<br /><br />The M-5 trans can only take so much. Maybe go automatic? A 4R70-W can take much more than that. It was also behind the 4.6L (V-8) Mustang and T-Bird.<br /><br />My advice. Make sure your PCV system is functioning correctly. Also, the thicker oils (viscosity) tend to puddle in the upper end and leak down through the valve seals. No fault of the engine. It likes the lighter weight oils better. The 3.0 is good for at least 250,000, with good care. I've seen many over 300k.

 

[jasonnb]

Re: Ford Ranger

Yeah, the tranny can't handle too much more. When I bought the truck, a mechanic told me the tranny would grenade at 80K miles and the engine would follow at 100-120k. They are both at 142k with no signs of giving up. The only modification to the trans was I replaced the rubber fluid caps on top with SS to keep it from leaking. The funny part of the mechanics estimates above it that I didn't use this truck to pull a boat until it had 110k on it.<br /><br />Beefing up the ranger may end up being one of those pipe dreams that gets shoved to the wayside as other things take priority, but if given the chance, another 20-25hp wouldn't be bad. <br /><br />At the rate this truck is going, I may not need a rebuild for a long time anyway. That would be just fine by me. I believe this truck has many miles left as it is with just normal maintenance.