rjh44

is this considered to be a good engine? is it made in the US?

JohnR66

"rjh44" <rjh44@adelphia.com> wrote in message
news:LaOdne9XxqbgiULfRVn-1g@adelphia.com...
> is this considered to be a good engine? is it made in the US?
>
I heard it is a Mazda engine, but that may be incorrect. Does anyone know?
Anyhoo, I had a 91 Ranger and now an 04. Doing 65 on the highway going up a
slight incline with a moderate load, the 91 felt like it was out of breath.
The 04 doesn't feel this way even though I have 3.73 gears. The 91 had 4.10
ratio. The 4.10 gears would be a better match for the DOHC engine since
power rolls in at higher RPMs. The 3.73 ratio make it feel lethargic in
normal lower rpm driving, however, fuel economy is great. I get 26-27 mpg
normally and I got 30mpg on a trip where 60% of the tank was burned on the
highway. I estimate I could get 32-34 mpg all highway. I should mention that
I have 5 speed trans in both cases. I'm not sure I'd want a 4 cyl with an
automatic.

John

CJB

The 2.3 has been around for a very long time, I think since the Pinto in the
70's. It's a good engine.

CJB

"rjh44" <rjh44@adelphia.com> wrote in message
news:LaOdne9XxqbgiULfRVn-1g@adelphia.com...
> is this considered to be a good engine? is it made in the US?
>

JimV

CJB wrote:
> The 2.3 has been around for a very long time, I think since the Pinto in the
> 70's. It's a good engine.
>
> CJB
>
> "rjh44" <rjh44@adelphia.com> wrote in message
> news:LaOdne9XxqbgiULfRVn-1g@adelphia.com...
>
>>is this considered to be a good engine? is it made in the US?
>>

That was a different 2.3.

CJB

I thought they were related.

CJB

"JimV" <jv9999@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:sd6dnXweF8s5yH3fRVn-uA@comcast.com...
> CJB wrote:
>> The 2.3 has been around for a very long time, I think since the Pinto in
>> the 70's. It's a good engine.
>>
>> CJB
>>
>> "rjh44" <rjh44@adelphia.com> wrote in message
>> news:LaOdne9XxqbgiULfRVn-1g@adelphia.com...
>>
>>>is this considered to be a good engine? is it made in the US?
>>>
>
> That was a different 2.3.
>

CJB

We're gonna hope that it's a good engine, because I just bought a 97 Ranger
with one. :-)

CJB

"rjh44" <rjh44@adelphia.com> wrote in message
news:LaOdne9XxqbgiULfRVn-1g@adelphia.com...
> is this considered to be a good engine? is it made in the US?
>

Scott

"CJB" <colonyparkwagon@excite.nospam> wrote in message
news:tIfEe.298$9y3.213@trnddc06...
> We're gonna hope that it's a good engine, because I just bought a 97
> Ranger with one. :-)
>
> CJB
>
> "rjh44" <rjh44@adelphia.com> wrote in message
> news:LaOdne9XxqbgiULfRVn-1g@adelphia.com...
>> is this considered to be a good engine? is it made in the US?
>>

If you got a 97 Ranger with an aluminum engine, it has
had the engine swapped.
They didnt make an aluminum 2.3 until 2001.

CJB

"Scott" <homealone.com> wrote in message
news:11e4kk7crehn3c0@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "CJB" <colonyparkwagon@excite.nospam> wrote in message
> news:tIfEe.298$9y3.213@trnddc06...
>> We're gonna hope that it's a good engine, because I just bought a 97
>> Ranger with one. :-)
>>
>> CJB
>>
>> "rjh44" <rjh44@adelphia.com> wrote in message
>> news:LaOdne9XxqbgiULfRVn-1g@adelphia.com...
>>> is this considered to be a good engine? is it made in the US?
>>>
>
> If you got a 97 Ranger with an aluminum engine, it has
> had the engine swapped.
> They didnt make an aluminum 2.3 until 2001.
>
Oh, ok. I guess I've proven now that I didn't know what I was talking
about... *duh*

CJB

Scott

"CJB" <colonyparkwagon@excite.nospam> wrote in message
news:8jwEe.2433$uy3.1690@trnddc05...
>
> "Scott" <homealone.com> wrote in message
> news:11e4kk7crehn3c0@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>> "CJB" <colonyparkwagon@excite.nospam> wrote in message
>> news:tIfEe.298$9y3.213@trnddc06...
>>> We're gonna hope that it's a good engine, because I just bought a 97
>>> Ranger with one. :-)
>>>
>>> CJB
>>>
>>> "rjh44" <rjh44@adelphia.com> wrote in message
>>> news:LaOdne9XxqbgiULfRVn-1g@adelphia.com...
>>>> is this considered to be a good engine? is it made in the US?
>>>>
>>
>> If you got a 97 Ranger with an aluminum engine, it has
>> had the engine swapped.
>> They didnt make an aluminum 2.3 until 2001.
>>
> Oh, ok. I guess I've proven now that I didn't know what I was talking
> about... *duh*
>
> CJB

Not at all. There have been MANY changes to the Rangers since
98. Hard to keep up with them all.

Dave...

On Sat 23 Jul 2005 10:38:03p, Scott assaulted the computer and came up with
this:

>
>>> If you got a 97 Ranger with an aluminum engine, it has
>>> had the engine swapped.
>>> They didnt make an aluminum 2.3 until 2001.
>>>
>> Oh, ok. I guess I've proven now that I didn't know what I was talking
>> about... *duh*
>>
>> CJB
>
> Not at all. There have been MANY changes to the Rangers since
> 98. Hard to keep up with them all.
>
>

my 86 and 94 has cast iron engines and heads, very heavy.