Looking for a few more HP on a 3.0 vulcan engine

[boss3.0lranger]

Ahh, yeah the solid part of the fuel line that sticks up is actually part of the fuel supply line, and not the rail itself. This pic shows it fairly well, right in line with the intake ports and thermostat housing (which might also be an obstacle):

I can see how you'd want to change that to make supercharger installation easier, but I'd want to measure and check to see clearance on the thermostat housing/upper radiator hose too. No reason to bother with fuel supply line/rails if the thermostat/radiator hose are going to be an issue you can't easily do anything about. You may indeed be better off offsetting the charger than messing with the time and money needed to resolve both of those hurdles.


Is your truck flex fuel or standard? AFAIK, the standard Vulcan had 19lb injectors and the flex fuel had 24lb injectors. If your truck is standard fuel, the flex fuel options should be an easy plug and play solution (assuming you get a proper tune). The 1.8's and other stuff might be helped with larger injectors, and a subsequent tune but it's probably not required. It would be less money to keep the stock injectors/tune if you're just running the 1.8 rollers, and save the other upgrades for when you add boost and they're truly needed.

Hello,
Could you post a picture of the maf sensor? Was this with kit or stock in photo? As for Whipple they have special calibrations for Maf and box as well as throttle body and larger 24lb injectors but due to age of kit, they no longer have exact parts for their calibrations for their reflashing of PCM Thanks

 

[Lefty]

Wonderful work here. It got me to thinking. I'm wondering which is better: a supercharged vulcan or a larger engine.

I would imagine that a supercharger is a great way to boost performance without adding weight. Weight seems to be especially relevant with pickups which tend to be front end heavy>

On the other hand, the supercharger costs $2K without factoring in the cost of all of the other ancillary parts. It may save on mileage, but never really pay for itself.

Would it be better to just swap engines and suffer poor weight distribution?

 

[ericbphoto]

Wonderful work here. It got me to thinking. I'm wondering which is better: a supercharged vulcan or a larger engine.

I would imagine that a supercharger is a great way to boost performance without adding weight. Weight seems to be especially relevant with pickups which tend to be front end heavy>

On the other hand, the supercharger costs $2K without factoring in the cost of all of the other ancillary parts. It may save on mileage, but never really pay for itself.

Would it be better to just swap engines and suffer poor weight distribution?

Maybe. But not everything is done purely for economy or efficiency or because it's easier. Some things, especially when it comes to hobbies, are done "Because that's how I want to do it. I want something unique and different. I want the experience and education of doing it this way. Etc.."

 

[RonD]

Wonderful work here. It got me to thinking. I'm wondering which is better: a supercharged vulcan or a larger engine.

I would imagine that a supercharger is a great way to boost performance without adding weight. Weight seems to be especially relevant with pickups which tend to be front end heavy>

On the other hand, the supercharger costs $2K without factoring in the cost of all of the other ancillary parts. It may save on mileage, but never really pay for itself.

Would it be better to just swap engines and suffer poor weight distribution?

In my opinion you are better off long term using an engine that is not being run close to its "limits"
A 302/5.0l OHV V8 can run at 250HP without stressing it at all
3.0l Vulcan would be at its limits, so more prone to a failure

Later model 302/5.0l weight about 450lbs, 3.0l Vulcan 350lbs, so less than 1 passenger difference

 

[Lefty]

In my opinion you are better off long term using an engine that is not being run close to its "limits"
A 302/5.0l OHV V8 can run at 250HP without stressing it at all
3.0l Vulcan would be at its limits, so more prone to a failure

Later model 302/5.0l weight about 450lbs, 3.0l Vulcan 350lbs, so less than 1 passenger difference

Fast and nimble vs. a fast that lasts.

 

[boss3.0lranger]

Hello all, in any build concept of theory, HOW MUCH HP/TQ you expect vs dollars. Vulcan by far and stated in many past post is not user friendly or has aftermarket support. Research every thing, read hours of post get a good knowledge of what you have and expect. 182.2 cubic in @ 160-186 + - = approx 0.879xxxx ish approx, so in stock form low power. Build a more efficient engine avg aspect is 1.2-1.4 is most attainable in stock form.
So choice of components is learning where your engine is working through your needs. Math is your friend, measurements and clearances must be check there is no one thing install without checking.
This string is of an old kit produced by Whipple(discontinued) when the company was interested in ford small trucks.
Have 50state emissions tag as well.
Whipple charger are inherently super efficient charger also it does not add extremes amount of heat!! This is very important clue to a very inherent problem with the fords very POOR 3.0 Vulcan combustion champer with all the technology of years they choose to build it with that crap head, anyway.
In exchange to other engine again HP/TQ with avg ratio can determine your choice in going forth.
Turbo's n belt super charger or pro chargers have come so efficient and more available. But over coming the weak points of any engine, head bolt placement or type, crank vs stroke n rod angles all have pro/cons.

 

[boss3.0lranger]

On Vulcan running at limits, over coming the weak points and over build is support. Aftermarket is weak on this hi produced engine over large line of different vehicles.
Custom parts and time would be factor.

Working knowledge of engine and components sizes. Stoke 3.0 rod bearing journals are x then have machine shop off set grind crank to match other engine journal that are smaller this adds stroke, then rod length will aid in ratios. Custom pistons from many manufacturing companies have build sheet. Mic block deck, cylinder length, your deck/piston over under, rebalance rotating assemble. Being your building a better then stock with better materials give you a longer lasting power plant. Reasonable 1.8-2.4 is very obtainable with good tune. Efi has disadvantage of pleaum to port, most systems are port over valve, in carb or intake efi carb style systems this cooling of the spray in the pleaum cooling the charge to valve entering the engine is huge reduction of temp! At race track notice most races have their tunnel rams covered with sheets small gauge panel to maximize this cooling effect, can be as much as when you drive at night! Wow my engine runs great but heat day such a pig? What happen it's heat!

So with Vulcan running 1.8-2.0 per cub and then last is the key.
Would stock engine? Hell no, so build it,
Whipple vs turbo, well I so happened to find a working Whipple Vulcan kit, I also have f150 svt 5.4l super charger, but if doing a clean install and NOT using 4r55-5r55 style trans, my choice be Holley sniper carb efi that has boost map in the it's CPU I would then twin turbo for sure, this as well 4.0-5.0 so forth, just few points of thought.
Thanks

 

[superj]

But, superchargers sound cool

I wonder if there is a way to put a small s/c from a mini cooper on? We changed the pulley on our 04 and 05 sc minis and were smoking camaros and mustangs light to light

 

[stmitch]

Hello,
Could you post a picture of the maf sensor? Was this with kit or stock in photo? As for Whipple they have special calibrations for Maf and box as well as throttle body and larger 24lb injectors but due to age of kit, they no longer have exact parts for their calibrations for their reflashing of PCM Thanks

I have a whipple on my Vulcan, but the photo is just one that I found on the internet. The part number printed on my MAF is # 1L2F-12B579-BA. It's been 10 years since I installed it, but I'm pretty sure it's the stock MAF and housing for a 4.0 SOHC Ranger or Explorer.
You'll need the matching lid for the Air filter box too if you don't want to use a cone style air filter.

 

[boss3.0lranger]

Thank you,
I have been spending weeks looking at pn# Whipple gave me, but it was for box w/Maf sensor. They have no other info.
Your helping has been amazing thanks for the information.
At least gives me starting point.
Next is valve sizes for cylinder head. The stopping point is harden seats to valve pocket. These heads are thin.
Have to have machine shop that can help with custom sizes and seat cut thickness to fit.
Presently measure crank n adjust for under cut and new journals. Came up with 3.390" .250" stroker. Small journal small block chevy. 5.7" rod. Just waiting on Ross piston for their info. Price n all, coatings as well.
Doing a completely modified engine is very obtainable with measure everything.
Being auto there is not much issue of crank breaking like would being std trans. Also light pistons.

Sealing is copper head gaskets with steel wire with receiver. Will have to monitor coolant block pressure at higher rpm's. Water pump can exert hi pressure hi rpm.

 

[O No 3.0!]

I ported my maf & it had a very noticeable pick up, esp in the upper rpms. I cut out the whole center piece, only leaving the small round part. I smoothed the rest of it out with a dremal & a small sanding roll.

 

[Lefty]

I ported my maf & it had a very noticeable pick up, esp in the upper rpms. I cut out the whole center piece, only leaving the small round part. I smoothed the rest of it out with a dremal & a small sanding roll.

Pictures?

 

[O No 3.0!]

Only one i have.

 

[O No 3.0!]

I also got rid of the silencer on the end of the intake pipe where it goes thru the inner fender & opened the end of the filter box as much as i could & put in a k&n filter.

 

[Lefty]

View attachment 91860
Only one i have.

Nicely done! Yours looks as though it was manufactured that way, like an aftermarket speed part. The other members suggest that this will only work on early model vulcans, probably 1992-1995. Newer versions, such as my 2003, are partly made from plastic. The little green dot on the bottom might be a temperature sensor.