Towing with a 2000 Ford Ranger 3.0 Auto - Page 2 - Fiberglass RV


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-09-2015, 11:26 AM   #15
Junior Member
 
Name: Eric
Trailer: 2001 Casita 17' FD
California
Posts: 21
Four liter Rangers had bigger brakes

At least in 2001 the 4L Rangers had much bigger brakes than the 3L Rangers. (My brother-in-law once put the smaller rotors on my Ranger so the calipers extended over the edge of the rotors.)
I always suspected that they had bigger transmission coolers and alternators too. One very hot summer I towed my 17' Casita from San Diego to Kentucky and back watching the transmission temperature on a ScanGauge. The transmission never did get really hot. I wonder if one could do that with a Ranger that was not designed to tow 6000 pounds.
__________________

__________________
Eric Heinz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2015, 09:36 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
floyd's Avatar
 
Name: Floyd
Trailer: 2004 13 ft Scamp Custom Deluxe
IllAnnoy
Posts: 6,048
Registry
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carol H View Post
Yup and some in 2000 model year were as low as 1580 lbs tow capacity.

The PDF from Ford showing the towing capacities of the various models of the 2000 Ford Ranger can be found here:

WWW.fleet.ford.com/truckbbas/non-html/2000/bbcamper.PDF

The Ranger specs are on Page 9
That's the manufacturers "tow rating" , not capacity. The rating doesn't change for a given model and year, but many times it changes from year to year on exactly the same vehicle.
"Towing capacity" on the other hand, is affected by everything from aftermarket parts and modifications to wear and neglect.
__________________

__________________
floyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2015, 09:42 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
floyd's Avatar
 
Name: Floyd
Trailer: 2004 13 ft Scamp Custom Deluxe
IllAnnoy
Posts: 6,048
Registry
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Heinz View Post
At least in 2001 the 4L Rangers had much bigger brakes than the 3L Rangers. (My brother-in-law once put the smaller rotors on my Ranger so the calipers extended over the edge of the rotors.)
I always suspected that they had bigger transmission coolers and alternators too. One very hot summer I towed my 17' Casita from San Diego to Kentucky and back watching the transmission temperature on a ScanGauge. The transmission never did get really hot. I wonder if one could do that with a Ranger that was not designed to tow 6000 pounds.
My 2001 4.0L doesn't have a transmission cooler, but it does have a single rail shifter with which you can actually monitor trans temps by holding the shifter below the knob.
__________________
floyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2015, 10:58 AM   #18
Member
 
Name: Dale
Trailer: Trillium
Saskatchewan
Posts: 80
Having owned a 3.0L ranger before i'd be hesitant to tow any significant weight any distance. That 145hp motor will be under significant strain with any major wind or hills, I remember my AC kicking out on uphills and it struggling to keep up with traffic, all while drinking as much gas as a full size and punishing me for having a small fuel tank.

Honestly my 06 jetta with a gas turbo motor was a more comfortable tow vehicle.
__________________
dbir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2015, 03:18 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
floyd's Avatar
 
Name: Floyd
Trailer: 2004 13 ft Scamp Custom Deluxe
IllAnnoy
Posts: 6,048
Registry
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbir View Post
Having owned a 3.0L ranger before i'd be hesitant to tow any significant weight any distance. That 145hp motor will be under significant strain with any major wind or hills, I remember my AC kicking out on uphills and it struggling to keep up with traffic, all while drinking as much gas as a full size and punishing me for having a small fuel tank.

Honestly my 06 jetta with a gas turbo motor was a more comfortable tow vehicle.
The 3.0L Ford is a great engine with incredible reliability. Ford even makes a blower kit (apples and apples) for it which adds about a hundred HP.

Sounds like your penalty was the automatic transmission and that supercab,and maybe 4X4??(am I right?)... not so much the engine.
I know of several 16 Scamps which have been or are being pulled satisfactorily with 4CYL Rangers.
Of course, this is all contingent on what the definition of is is!
Like what constitutes "significant"... weight, distance, strain, wind, hills or struggling!
Your point is well made though, because you relate how your particular truck felt to you under what you described as a significant load and so you have provided a valuable opinion which should cast its share of light on the question.

The problem is that while an '06 Jetta turbo is a fairly defined commodity,
Simply saying "a 3.0L Ranger" leaves us with nearly a quarter century of production with dozens of variations for each year, not to mention age and condition.
The Ranger (all years and variations)certainly provided a better chassis and had more appropriate mods available for towing than the Jetta.

This all makes for an interesting discussion, but it illustrates the limitations imposed by the OP's inquiry.

One fact remains, The Ranger has been one of the most popular tow vehicles for small fiberglass RVs(I.E.Scamp sized) literally for decades.
[perhaps even the most popular overall]
__________________
floyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2015, 03:49 PM   #20
Member
 
Name: Dale
Trailer: Trillium
Saskatchewan
Posts: 80
I can go into more detail,

my truck was an 06, 5 speed, rwd. Photo below.

I can see rangers being popular as a tow vehicle for their size, and in some trim's rated capacity, they are great daily drivers, good sight lines, and easy to park. But, the vulcan 3.0l is a dinosaur, its a nearly 30 year old motor designed to be put into a car, although respectably reliable i didn't find it sufficient for towing frequently (it lacks power to drive out of a sway, to climb hills without being an impediment, and to pass when needed) The 4.0l option makes a world of difference in that vehicle.

For context i lived in Northern ontario at the time, hilly country, and if faced with a head wind, or a climb it would get single digit mpg.

My advice if you're determined to pull with a 3.0l ranger - find a way to monitor the transmission temperatures, make sure you've got trailer brakes, and if traveling in rural areas carry additional fuel (that 17-20 gallon tank will only get you 150 miles loaded with an unfriendly wind) Also check what rear gear your truck is equipped with - They came with 3.55, 3.73, and 4.10, a numarically higher rear gear will greatly assist with the towing - at the sacrifice of higher highway RPM.

__________________
dbir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2015, 04:01 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
Jon in AZ's Avatar
 
Name: Jon
Trailer: 2008 Scamp 13 S1
Arizona
Posts: 5,566
Registry
Quote:
Originally Posted by floyd View Post
...The Ranger has been one of the most popular tow vehicles for small fiberglass RVs(I.E.Scamp sized) literally for decades.
[perhaps even the most popular overall]
The original post was not about a Scamp, but a Casita 17D, which is a big step up in weight.
__________________
Jon in AZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2015, 08:56 PM   #22
Member
 
Name: j
Trailer: Currently Shopping"
Alabama
Posts: 38
Have been towing a 17 ft Casita Liberty Deluxe

with a Chevy S10 4 cyl. Has a 5 speed. Have a brake control, also a load leveler with friction sway control bars. This load leveler is certainly worth having. The truck did ok without it, but really much better with it. Not real speedy, and haven't gone to the mountains with it. Am around Alabama. The truck has 300 thousand miles on it. Am debating as to wheather to start using this other S10 with same engine but it has automatic transmission. Mileage is 110 thousand.
Bottom line ,the 4 cyl will certainly work.
__________________
bubblelover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2015, 09:35 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
floyd's Avatar
 
Name: Floyd
Trailer: 2004 13 ft Scamp Custom Deluxe
IllAnnoy
Posts: 6,048
Registry
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon in AZ View Post
The original post was not about a Scamp, but a Casita 17D, which is a big step up in weight.
In context...
My statement was made in response to comparing the Ranger 3.0L to a VW Jetta as a competent tow vehicle.

There is of course a big step up in weight compared to a Scamp, except possibly a very small step up from a Scamp fiver which also presents a lot more frontal area. Scamp used a 3.0L Ranger for delivering 5ers for many years. I'm not sure which engine their new (er) Ranger has, but the old one was still around last I checked.
Notice that they used a Ranger for their latest videos for towing the 5er as well.
__________________

__________________
floyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Towing with a 2000 Ford Ranger 3.0 Auto mgbbob Towing, Hitching, Axles and Running Gear 27 03-01-2015 04:33 PM
Casita 17' Deluxe and towing with Toyota Tacoma or Ford Ranger? JaneM. Towing, Hitching, Axles and Running Gear 47 04-25-2011 01:52 PM
Towing with a Ford Ranger 4X4 4.0L Tom H. Towing, Hitching, Axles and Running Gear 4 06-10-2009 07:03 AM
towing options w/ ford ranger Justin, M Towing, Hitching, Axles and Running Gear 18 04-18-2008 01:30 AM

» Upcoming Events
No events scheduled in
the next 465 days.
» Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.