• Welcome Visitor! Please take a few seconds and Register for our forum. Even if you don't want to post, you can still 'Like' and react to posts.

13b in ranger


Gui

New Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2008
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
38
Location
Nanaimo B.C. Canada since 92
Vehicle Year
1992
Make / Model
ford ranger
Engine Size
4.0l v6
Transmission
Automatic
i think ford should put a 13b turbo off a rx7 in there rangers like mazda did with there REPU trucks this thing would get better gas milage than 4.0 and give you sam or way better power went you put ur foot down and turbo spools up,or you have it run higher psi

(The Rotary Pickup (REPU) from Mazda was the world's first and only Wankel engined pickup truck. It was sold from 1974 to 1977 and appears to have been available only in the United States and Canada. Toyo Kogyo (Mazda) made trucks for Ford in the Courier as well as its own Mazda B-Series. These trucks shared many of the same parts, but the Rotary Engined Pickup (REPU) had a 4-port 13B 4-barrel carbureted engine, flared fenders, a different dash, front grille, and round taillights.)

The 13B-DEI was turbocharged in 1987. It features the newer four-injector fuel injection of the 6PI engine, but lacks that engine's eponymous variable intake system. The twin-scroll turbocharger is fed with a two-stage valve to reduce turbo lag. Output is way up at 185 hp (138 kW) at 6500 rpm and 183 ft·lbf (248 N·m) at 3500 rpm.

compared to the stock 4.0l

The 4.0 version, although produced in Cologne like the others, was only fitted to American vehicles. The pushrod OHV engine was produced until 2000 and was used in the Ford Explorer, Ford Aerostar, Mazda B4000 and Ford Ranger. Output was 160 hp (119 kW) and 225 ft·lbf (305 N·m). Though there is some variation, typically 155 hp (116 kW) is quoted as horsepower for 1990-92 applications.

the thing is that no-one know of this engine???and since turbo technology has come a long way now...
 


Gui

New Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2008
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
38
Location
Nanaimo B.C. Canada since 92
Vehicle Year
1992
Make / Model
ford ranger
Engine Size
4.0l v6
Transmission
Automatic
or sorry that was an old 13b heres a newer one, prob be easyer fitting this than an old v8 when my brothers 3rd gen rx7 rapes the new mustangs and he only took out emitions,ported his turbo to get better mpg,and bigger intercooler and only running 10 psi. funny how all these v8 guys think there so badass

(Series 6 (1992–1995) was exported throughout the world and had the highest sales. In Japan, Mazda sold the RX-7 through its Efini brand as the Efini RX-7. Only the 1993–1995 model years were sold in the U.S. and Canada. Series 6 came with 255 PS (188 kW/252 hp) and 294 N·m (217 lb·ft)
 

Wicked_Sludge

New Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
6,937
Reaction score
43
Points
0
Age
38
Location
Westport, WA
Vehicle Year
1993
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
3-point-GO
Transmission
Manual
horsepower isnt everything, especially in a truck. its my opinion that the higher the HP/torque spread, the less streetable a vehicle is.

theres videos on youtube of those wankels putting out over 1,000HP, but they do it at an amazingly high RPM and require huge turbos to do it (laaaag). are you really willing to dual-stage your vehicle at every stop light in order to get decent acceleration?

wankels are high revving engines by nature (hense all the technology applied in order to produce even acceptable levels of low end torque). ive seen rotory powered vehicles on the street...ive even ridden in one of those wankel pickups and they can be fun (a guy i used to work with is a big mazda buff)...but catch one on the wrong gear and its all over very quickly. its true what they say...there really is no replacement for displacement, and thats why all those v-8 guys think they are (and are) badass.

that said, i think a 2.3 turbo swap will get you similar power, better mileage (not sure who told you rotorys get good mileage, they are HOGS), and is nearly bolt-in.
 

DetUnd

New Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Windsor, Ontario
Vehicle Year
1994
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
2.3L Turbo
Transmission
Manual
If i were to put one in, which i have been pondering, it would be a 20b-rew triple rotor dual turbo. Other than that i would probably just put a 2.3 turbo (because it's practical).
 

rurouni20xx

New Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2009
Messages
1,176
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
natchitoches, la
Vehicle Year
1993
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
3.0L V6
Transmission
Automatic
i think your both nutz and that engine w/ a turbo gets by far less mileage than a 4.0. a twin turbo 18 or 20 get around 12 mpg tops, but by the time you drop the clutch to pull the weight of the ranger around your going to drink more than that. the torque number is so low that you have to run around 5k rpm to pull it around. this has been pondered upon a few times but for the most part its not practical. strip only use going for 1/4 mile times, yeah it would be kewl, but dd it would get old quick, forget 4wd.
 

DetUnd

New Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Windsor, Ontario
Vehicle Year
1994
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
2.3L Turbo
Transmission
Manual
your totally right. that's why I have a 2.3 T. I have other daily drivers so it would make fun to have a bagged dragger revving around town. Your not saving gas when your draggin' your a** either.
But again, you are right. not practical. might as well put a 5.4 in it. or a turbo diesel. I'm just being stupid. I have a 2.3 cosworth in my austin, anythings possible.
I still really like the Forzda idea. Turbo is fun!
 

rurouni20xx

New Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2009
Messages
1,176
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
natchitoches, la
Vehicle Year
1993
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
3.0L V6
Transmission
Automatic
i do too but nothing i would do unless i had the two laying around and got bored.
 

simpsonsrules69

New Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2009
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
dublin, ca
Vehicle Year
1990
Make / Model
ford
Engine Size
2.9L
Transmission
Manual
i think that would be f***in sick
 

Mtrhd0024

New Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2009
Messages
192
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
High Point/Thomasville NC
Vehicle Year
1990
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
2.9
Transmission
Manual
I think a wankel ranger would be pretty sweet if it was a street truck, but not for the reasons you specified. It wouldn't make for a good trail rig at all.

Wankel engines don't put out a huge amount of torque, and as someone just mentioned, most of the power is way up in the rev range. As someone has also pointed out, they suck gas big time, so don't go puttin one into your truck thinkin its gonna get good mileage!

My dad's had 4 different rotary vehicles, a Mazda R100, and 3 different RX7s. One of his best friends from highschool is a HUGE rotary buff, and has owned so many rotary cars and trucks I don't think you could count them. He's actually kinda renowned for his knowledge of the Mazda Rotary. He's currently got the lowest mileage (that we know of) Mazda rotary pickup in the world with like 15k original miles on it. Its absolutely mint!

So this would be a sweet conversion if you wanted something different, but It doesn't make sense in some ways as well.
 

DetUnd

New Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Windsor, Ontario
Vehicle Year
1994
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
2.3L Turbo
Transmission
Manual
I actually think this is a good idea. when my motor dies (it's getting close) I'm gonna get myself a 20b-rew or a low km 13b. I used to own a rx-7 infinity, loved it/crashed it. I can just imagine letting the air out of the bags, and crusing at 50kms just revving the crap out of it. Awesome. Thanks for helping me dream of good thoughts including my ranger.
 

rurouni20xx

New Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2009
Messages
1,176
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
natchitoches, la
Vehicle Year
1993
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
3.0L V6
Transmission
Automatic
just dont forget one thing while having fun, ranger suspension is def not rx7 tuned suspension, be careful hanging corners but sliding around them and drifting would be awesome. one day i may get back into the drift scene and a low 2wd drift trk would be kind of awesome imo, just have to practically weld the axle in place...
 

AllanD

TRS Technical Staff
TRS Technical Advisor
Joined
Jun 1, 2001
Messages
7,897
Reaction score
134
Points
63
Age
62
Location
East-Central Pennsylvania
Vehicle Year
1987... sorta
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
'93 4.0
Transmission
Manual
Several years ago, before there wasa TRS one of the local mechanics
had a Ford Courier that came from the factory with a 2.3Lima engine

I put the idea in his head to replace it with a thunderbird engine
and he did, one of the 160hp engines from an '86 'bird

He sold it, because it scared the crap out of him... and I mean literally as well
as the other way... the thing is that those old Couriers and early Mazda "B" trucks
just over 2000#, instead of just over 3000#.

It didn't handle well, it didn't brake well and had non-exsistant traction.
But it would go...

Remember that a properly tuned 2.3turbo can be dangerous in a Ranger
in dry weather let alone wet.

Between the torque and the light ass of a pickup truck...

the turbo engine are big one torque, but even turbo'ed
the Rotaries aren't big on low-end torque.

Now, get one of those old kits from Racing Beat that allowed
you to graft TWO 13B's together... You'd wind up with a Ranger
that would be undriveably fast... because they just aren't stable
at high speeds.

AD

AD
 

rurouni20xx

New Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2009
Messages
1,176
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
natchitoches, la
Vehicle Year
1993
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
3.0L V6
Transmission
Automatic
are you trying to give me ideas or something buddy? if it looks dangerous, i like it, and scary fast gives me a hard on!
 

AllanD

TRS Technical Staff
TRS Technical Advisor
Joined
Jun 1, 2001
Messages
7,897
Reaction score
134
Points
63
Age
62
Location
East-Central Pennsylvania
Vehicle Year
1987... sorta
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
'93 4.0
Transmission
Manual
I like "scary fast" that can turn and more importantly STOP.

And though this may sound odd for that I'm putting my Saab back together.

A Saab? Fast?

Oh yeah...

Most people don't expect it to be, and that is the whole point:)

AD
 

rurouni20xx

New Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2009
Messages
1,176
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
natchitoches, la
Vehicle Year
1993
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
3.0L V6
Transmission
Automatic
I like "scary fast" that can turn and more importantly STOP.

And though this may sound odd for that I'm putting my Saab back together.

A Saab? Fast?

Oh yeah...

Most people don't expect it to be, and that is the whole point:)

AD
i understand this but at the same time bolting a turbo to a stock pinto made it run 11 secs too last time i checked, anything is possible w/ ones mind set on it. the more i look at the ranger 2wd tho the more i think older mustang brakes may work w/ some fabrication. wouldnt surprise me if you could get the suspension to work as well if you were crazy enuff...
 

Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad

Staff online

Today's birthdays

Member & Vendor Upgrades

For a small yearly donation, you can support this forum and receive a 'Supporting Member' banner, or become a 'Supporting Vendor' and promote your products here. Click the banner to find out how.

Truck of The Month


Shran
April Truck of The Month

Recently Featured

Want to see your truck here? Share your photos and details in the forum.

Follow TRS On Instagram

TRS Events

25th Anniversary Sponsors

Check Out The TRS Store


Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad

Sponsored Ad


Amazon Deals

Top