2.9 to 3.0?

[d9n]

Here's the deal, the 2.9/5sp in my 87' 2wd is on it's last leg. I've come across a complete 04' 3.0/auto drivetrain (accident truck) with 56k for cheap. Is it worth the swap?
thanks

[rusty ol ranger]

No.

You'll lose power, and it'll be a pain in the ass.

Go with anbother 2.9.

later,
Dustin

[rickcdewitt]

put a 5.0l in there!

[Ranger44]

How would he lose power? 3.0 is rated at 12 more horses than the 2.9. If he can get the whole engine and tranny for cheap I'd say go with it. Only reason the peolpe don't like the 3.0 is because they say it lacks power. But the truth is they lack tourqe down low. But have it up top around 3,000. The 3.0 is a very reliable engine, and can get around 24mpg (no overdrive, keep it at 3,200). You will need the computer and all wiring with the engine. Is the new engine from a 4x2 or 4x4?

[Wicked_Sludge]

agreed that the 3.0 will make more power than the 2.9. not only because the 3.0 MAKES more power than the 2.9...but also because most anything will make more power than a high-mileage, worn out motor.

also agreed that you might see better fuel economy.

heres the bad news: your donor motor is OBDII. this means your going to have to swipe many sensors, computer, engine wiring harness, engine mounts, possibly drivelines, exhaust at least as far as the rearmost O2, ect. you'll also have problems getting your gauges to work (the newer trans does not have provisions for a speedo cable), if the new truck is PATS, then your entire ignition will likely need to be swapped....im sure im missing something.

normally im all for guys upgrading to a 3.0...but i think in your case, its probably much more time, work, and money than just finding another runnable 2.9.

[Jspafford]

I have to disagree. My 2.9 has 147K on it and regularly gets anywhere between 17-24 mpg. You will be hard pressed to beat that with a 3.0L, besides, the 3.0L's are dogs unless you are running a manual transmission.

[Ranger44]

I guess I could agree. Unless you are up to alot of work a running 2.9 will be easiest to swap in.

[AllanD]

Wicked_Sludge already brought up the biggest nightmare: OBD2

If it were say... a 1994 3.0 I'd say go for it, but there is just way
too many generation gaps between the donor and the receipient

AD

[Mutant Pony]

It is a pretty big job just converting a 2.9 to a closer in year 3.0.
Are both trucks 5spd/2wd?
The easiest way would be to find an old Aerostar ('86-'87) for the intake and ECA, then retrofit the engine to run with the 2.9 wiring harness.

[d9n]

thanks guys, what the donor ranger is a running 04 2wd with a 3.0/ auto. The truck was passenger side punched and the front clip has been removed. It's to be auctioned. My truck is a 1987 2wd 2.9/5sp with a 4" lift, 30" tall tires, 4.10 LS 7.5 rearend and my everyday driver. If everything is with the 04', would everything bolt up?

[Mutant Pony]

The 3.0 won't bolt to the 2.9 trans. You would have to use the complete drivetrain and electrical system.
The '04 dash components won't fit the '87 dash so you would need to graft the whole dash in somehow.
The wiring runs through the the firewall in different places and has different holes.
I'm not sure if the motor mounts would work. I do know that the 3.0 mounts to '97 will work.
The two trucks are really completly different trucks. The only thing they share is the names.

[Makifo]

I have to disagree. My 2.9 has 147K on it and regularly gets anywhere between 17-24 mpg. You will be hard pressed to beat that with a 3.0L, besides, the 3.0L's are dogs unless you are running a manual transmission.
Hey Jspafford, I have an '89 with a 2.9 but can't manage to get better than 15 mpg. I don't drive it hard at all. I recently went with new plugs and wires and set the timing per the book. Not only is the mileage bad, in my opinion it lacks power. Do you do your own work under the hood? If so, what secrets do you have?
~Makifo

[Jspafford]

As a matter of fact I do work on my own trucks... With exception of the F-250, too new and expensive to screw up.

When I first got my B2 I never kept track of the mileage because back then it didn't cost shit to fill it up. Within the last 1.5 years I have been keeping pretty good dibs on the miles.

I do know that the more work I do to it, the better the mileage gets. The one thing that I noticed affected my mileage the most was a broken O2 sensor.

Other than that I have just about rebuilt the entire truck. The motors been out and painted, all new belt driven accessories at one time or another. Changed most of the sensors on the motor, Fuel Pressure Regulator, had the Injectors cleaned, put in a manual t-case and locking hubs, swapped in a M5OD tranny in place of the FM146, all new brakes, u-joints, steering components, etc.

So I can't tell you what one thing worked, but in the summer with the hubs unlocked and A/C off I averaged about 20-22MPG mixed driving. I took a small trip with the fiancee to a cabin in the woods in July. I had to leave the hubs locked to get up the driveway, but all the driving I did was in the country on winding roads and revved the motor a lot and got my best yet of 24.3MPG.

Needless to say, the F-250 is more a yard ornament at this point.

If you have any specific questions, shoot me a PM. I am pretty fluent with the 2.9L.

[Wicked_Sludge]

I have to disagree. My 2.9 has 147K on it and regularly gets anywhere between 17-24 mpg.

and some 3.0 guys have claimed as much as 30.

you cant base MPG claims on a single engine (unless your talking about an individual). you need to look at the average. most 2.9 guys see a steady 3-4MPG less than the 3.0 guys.

[Forcus]

If you have a fair amount of time to spend doing the swap and triple checking your work (and resolving any issues), I'd do it just for the newer engine, trans, fuel injection, etc. (but get the whole truck). But the thing that worries me is "every day driver". If this is your only vehicle I'd get a rebuilt long block, new belts, hoses, tune up stuff, and do the swap over a long weekend.

[d9n]

well it's my everyday driver, wife has the van and the son uses my other car everyday. The other factor is as of last week I'm out of work so I have the time at this point.
The ranger I'm looking at is all there except for the sheetmetal.
Oh, and thanks all for the replies.

[Jspafford]

Well I base my mileage claims (ignorantly I know) on the fact that I have a 1989 truck with a 2.9L that constantly gets 17-24mpg... I also have a 1999 3.0L that is hard pressed to get over 15mph, and it is driven by my fiancee. I rape the hell out of my 2.9 and still get great mileage for a 18 year old 4x4.

[HareRazor]

My 3.0 gets about 19mpg mixed driving with a little miss whereas my 2.9 is currently averaging 16mpg(ut oh). When I first got my 2.9 I would consistantly get 23mpg. Unless you have a lot of time on your hands I would stick with the 2.9. My 3.0 has never left me sitting.....

[d9n]

well the 3.0 parts truck sold for way more then I wanted to pay for it ($900) and I found another 2.9 to swap in. Now for a small rebuild on a 2.9. Thanks for all the info guys...