Ranger 2.3 aluminum block engine

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

The 2.3 has been around for a very long time, I think since the Pinto in the

CJB

That was a different 2.3.

I thought they were related.

CJB

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

CJB

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

1. Hard to keep up with them all.

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

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