Ford Ranger Wildtrak 2L v 3.2L

[AHPP]

Can't help on these particular engines but a thought occurred when I saw this thread. My gut feeling was the various adages like the old there's no replacement for displacement, revs kill engines etc. Obviously you want a big thing finding it easy rather than a little thing finding it hard. Obviously.

But. Unless you're going to map out, blank off etc the various emissions bollocks, perhaps smaller engines revving their tits off and running hot are the less worse option?

Any thoughts?

 

[Len the dog]

Diesel engines don’t rev their tits off, they use turbochargers that increase their torque. Engines have come a long way from the old big block long stroke behemoths favoured across the pond. Besides, those big ole lazy engines are very thirsty.

 

[Jh1986]

24 plate 2.0 here. Just hit 30k miles and had it's 2nd service recently. I specifically asked them to check the rear pad life as I'd heard some people having issues.

I've 40% life left on my pads. All wearing nice and evenly.

Zero issues.

 

[r judd]

Got a 3.2 had it 5.5 years done 93k in it. Averages 28mpg. Mixed motorway,towing,firewood,night activities foxing.
Only issue has been rear wiring loom, its made out of chocolate.
Mates had 2x 2l no faults just feels flat

 

[r judd]

I ran one as a works vehicle. It was the 3.2 V6 and it didn't have an easy life. During the time I had it it caused zero issues and only asked for copious amounts of diesel. Good truck.

They are 5 cylinder not V6

 

[slider]

What’s the situation with speed limits on Aroads and Dual Carriageways, I remember hearing something before but fully forgot about it!

All pick ups over 2040 kg unladen weight, wich is virtually all apart from L200's ans some Isuzus are restricted to LGV speed limits.
50 single carriageway
60 dual carriageway
70 Motorway

 

[204rips]

I’ve had Rangers as company vehicles since 2018, the 3.2 wildtrak, the 2L 170 bhp single turbo and the 2L biturbo and currently have a 6 month old new shape biturbo wildtrak. They have all been well used doing 30 to 40k a year and have all had issues. The 10min oil change on the 3.2 is a pain the arse plus they drink diesel like us going out of fashion, the old school slush auto box didn’t suit the engine although is a lot better after a remap. The 2L is as everyone has said a wet belt which is a concern, my limited 170bhp single turbo was a nightmare, dpf/turbo/rear diff/intercooler/boost leaks are the main things I can remember.

There’s no question when they run well their the best driving pick up on the road, my own money went on a L200.

 

[Gm81]

Can't help on these particular engines but a thought occurred when I saw this thread. My gut feeling was the various adages like the old there's no replacement for displacement, revs kill engines etc. Obviously you want a big thing finding it easy rather than a little thing finding it hard. Obviously.

But. Unless you're going to map out, blank off etc the various emissions bollocks, perhaps smaller engines revving their tits off and running hot are the less worse option?

Any thoughts?

Exactly why engines are smaller. A working engine creates heat for the after treatment systems. Big engine doesn't work as hard so you do get more after treatment issues if you don't work them.
Then you have all the legal hoops to jump through.... Ruined diesel engines.

 

[Scottb123]

I would go for 3.2 absolutely love mine stay clear of the the wet belt 2.0s

 

[HallyButt]

I have a few friends who are mechanics, their view is all the small eco boost Fords, right down to the Fiesta, are a pain and massively stressed. I would have thought 2L is a stretch for something that big