2002 Ford Ranger Consumer Review: Highly dissapointed with 3.0 L

2002 Ford Ranger - Consumer Review

Average Consumer Rating

144 Total Reviews

XL Regular Cab Pickup (2.3L 4-cyl. 5-speed Manual 6.0 ft. Bed)

Build Quality
Reliability Value
Highly dissapointed with 3.0 L power
By aquaman828 on


2002 Ford Ranger XL 2dr Regular Cab (2.3L 4cyl 5A)


I purchased this truck in Feb 09 and have had it for just over a year now. I got a great deal, so i bought it. The reliability of this truck is good, i haven't had any problems with it; just routine maintenance. This suspension is now decent after putting on KYB gas shocks. The 3.0 L engine is dangerously lacking power. The fuel economy is atrocious. It is a 6 cyl engine with V8 fuel economy and 4 cyl acceleration. I know nothing is wrong with my engine, just a terribly outdated design. Maybe good in the 90's but not now. The f150 has more power and gets better gas mileage. I see 14 mpg city, 17 hwy. Everyone who say it is good should test drive another truck, and wise up. 4.0l is also weak!

Best Features

It looks cool. It is a Ford. My aftermarket stereo, loud! Useful truck, but I am still upset about the lack of power. Seriously a V8 gets better gas mileage. Ford has no love for the ranger anymore.

Worst Features

Put the 3.7 liter from the new 2011 mustang accompanied with a 6 speed auto transmission. It would push out between 280-300 hp and get at least 25 hwy. Also make it a little bigger (Frontier size) Offer a V8 or a diesel for some towing power. Change the 15 year old truck already. Come on Ford!
Recommend (0) (2)

Are you the author of this review?

Update Your Review
Report it
Comments (0) Post a Comment
Post a Comment

You must be signed in to post a comment.


Select a different vehicle  
Recently Viewed
There are no recently viewed vehicles to display

Write Consumer Reviews

Write Consumer Reviews

Write a review and rate your own car.