Identify what I need for this 2.3

[kishy]

Hmm...most likely I'll run any remaining 5W30 hanging around on my property (since nothing else should get it, and probably only one jug of it left) then go 5W20. The Googles tells me that a 94 Ranger takes 5W20. Given that it will still be majority winter driven and Ford updated the spec retroactively to 5W20, annnnnd it should internally be like a new engine, makes sense to me. Found out it was stored in a heated garage until only about 3 months ago, so my concerns about cylinder wall rust may be unnecessary. Will scope it out through the plug holes though.

Found the write up for the 90-degree oil filter adapter. I like the idea of that, but the adapter has gotten quite pricey compared to what the write-up says. I'll watch junkyard vehicles to see if any show up that have it.

Also...lightened my wallet a bit. This project is a confirmed go. Months away, but a go nonetheless.

 

[kishy]

Hey Mark...
You had referred to this post: http://www.therangerstation.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1538802&postcount=2
in which you have an engine bay pic posted, showing the 'box' in which you put the ECM.

You referred to it (in your reply in this current thread) as "the protective box from the 96".

Problem I'm having is that 95-?? (97 at least) "protective boxes" for the ECM appear to be glued into the firewall, and don't seem to want to come out.



Any suggestions on how to get it out? I broke two today trying and decided I needed to re-evaluate before trying a third.

I do have the dust/water boot/lid to match the EEC-IV, so I just need the box to put it in...

In other news, the 93 EVTM arrived. I laid out the harness...there's a lot of wire here. I'm estimating at least a third is going byebye.



Got the exhaust manifold from a 93. Flow considerations aside, the intake air heat thing off the manifold is different, plus the EGR tube...it just made more sense to do this. I had a 15% discount waiting for me at that yard anyway, so it worked out. The shopping list is quite short now. New O2, probably new MAF (have a junkyard one but who knows how well that'll work out), some ground and high amp positive cables...belt, thermostat, hoses...eventually, once all hooked up and working, also a catalytic converter. Yes, it will have one.



Neither EVTM or my findings on the junkyard trucks have revealed a purge solenoid for the charcoal evap canister. If it just doesn't use one, well...cool. But I was kind of expecting to need to find one and hook it up. The pin I'd expect it might be is 11, but 11 shows "not used".

 

[Mark_88]

Wow Kishy, good score with the exhaust and EGR tube. Is that going to hook directly into the TB you are using? If so, it will save you quite a bit of work..

The protective box I pulled out was glued in also but I managed to get it out in one piece. Unfortunately it was about 4 years ago and it is kind of vague as to what I had to do...but I did remove the dash and disconnect the aluminum plate as that was bolted to the inner firewall.

I probably used a 12 in 1 tool and some razor blades to cut the adhesive around the box before attempting to pull it away...or maybe I was able to push it from the inside once the outer edge was cut back.

The dash removal is not actually that difficult but it took me a few head scratches to find the five bolts that hold it in there. The 95 dash is similar to the 96 so it should be easy to remove too.

The other other option would be to just build one out of something like the mounting cases for stereos or other components that are encased. I'm not good at building things like that without a place to work and the right tools...like a dremel and maybe a soldering iron or similar tool to fuse and seal the plastic.

 

[Mark_88]

Hmm...most likely I'll run any remaining 5W30 hanging around on my property (since nothing else should get it, and probably only one jug of it left) then go 5W20. The Googles tells me that a 94 Ranger takes 5W20. Given that it will still be majority winter driven and Ford updated the spec retroactively to 5W20, annnnnd it should internally be like a new engine, makes sense to me. Found out it was stored in a heated garage until only about 3 months ago, so my concerns about cylinder wall rust may be unnecessary. Will scope it out through the plug holes though.

Found the write up for the 90-degree oil filter adapter. I like the idea of that, but the adapter has gotten quite pricey compared to what the write-up says. I'll watch junkyard vehicles to see if any show up that have it.

Also...lightened my wallet a bit. This project is a confirmed go. Months away, but a go nonetheless.

That engine looks pretty clean...that will perk up the truck considerably once everything is worked out...

 

[kishy]

Wow Kishy, good score with the exhaust and EGR tube. Is that going to hook directly into the TB you are using? If so, it will save you quite a bit of work..

Yes, this EGR tube will mate directly with the EGR valve on the new engine...it should be about as easy as it gets.

The protective box I pulled out was glued in also but I managed to get it out in one piece. Unfortunately it was about 4 years ago and it is kind of vague as to what I had to do...but I did remove the dash and disconnect the aluminum plate as that was bolted to the inner firewall.

I probably used a 12 in 1 tool and some razor blades to cut the adhesive around the box before attempting to pull it away...or maybe I was able to push it from the inside once the outer edge was cut back.

The dash removal is not actually that difficult but it took me a few head scratches to find the five bolts that hold it in there. The 95 dash is similar to the 96 so it should be easy to remove too.

The other other option would be to just build one out of something like the mounting cases for stereos or other components that are encased. I'm not good at building things like that without a place to work and the right tools...like a dremel and maybe a soldering iron or similar tool to fuse and seal the plastic.

Ah...so it's normal for them to put up a fight. I had been hoping once the two retaining bolts were out, it'd just pop out. No such luck.

Dropping the dash sounds lovely. I'll evaluate access and see what I can come up with next time I'm at a yard. I'm not above attacking the truck with a reciprocating saw if it comes down to it. Knowing I will need to at least get eyes on the inside half helps though.

That engine looks pretty clean...that will perk up the truck considerably once everything is worked out...

It's crazy clean. I completely believe the story about how it was never installed in a vehicle.

I'm expecting it to wake things up nicely.

 

[Mark_88]

Be sure to grab that aluminum shield that sits under the ECM...it acts as a ground and probably anti-static as well as keeping the heat from building up. Not sure how hot those computers get but they are better in the upper dash than behind a kick panel in terms of air cooling.

You will notice the ground strap on the aluminum shield...that is probably the most critical component other than the box itself.

A sawzall might work well but there is quite a bit of metal to hack through...

 

[kishy]

Might as well put this here.
Took the harness apart, studied it a bit. Figured out most of what goes where.

Got rid of all wires I don't need, but stopped short of pulling out the A/C stuff. Will mull that over to decide later. A/C is definitely not part of the engine swap, that's for sure.

De-pinned C105, the round monster that interfaces through the firewall. No pinout seems to be available for it so I just started tracing things back and using my EEC-IV breakout box to check wires that went to the ECM connector. Eliminated a handful of wires. Made some messy notes.







What I numbered as "pigtail 2", the single wire is for the low oil level switch. I had no idea Ford did that in the trucks, my Lincoln has the same setup. But this 2.3 oil pan does not have the threaded hole for the switch so it will go unused.

It's unclear to me if the ECM wants to see the VSS only for cruise, or if it wants a VSS regardless. Since my truck doesn't have cruise, there is no existing VSS. Should be simple enough to add and I'll keep the VSS wiring in the harness regardless to help make cruise easier to retrofit later should a red wheel with cruise buttons show up.

 

[kishy]

Figured some things out (not the best things, unfortunately).
In 94 it appears Ford switched from the EVP (EGR valve position sensor) to DPFE (Differential Pressure Feedback EGR) for the computer to be able to determine how much the EGR is flowing. In the former case, it was calculated based on knowing how far open the valve is, and in the latter case it's observed by how much is actually flowing.

This is a problem for me because my engine has the newer style EGR valve, which does not have an EVP on it. There is also no pigtail on the engine harness for an EVP. There is, however, a pigtail that I'm pretty sure is for a DPFE...

The EGR tube, existing EGR valve, existing engine half of the harness and computer itself cannot all be pieced together to work as-is. I will need to install the older style EGR valve. The existing in-place EVR is usable. I will need to splice the EVP connector onto the wires currently used by the DPFE connector, and probably re-pin as required where the engine harness and body harness meet. Bit of a hack, but wires are wires. I have 3 wires, I need 3 wires.

Some relevant theory to be found here.

Related but doesn't affect anything here: it seems that 1993 2.3 automatic trans trucks do not have EGR at all. Maybe this was common knowledge here, but it's news to me (and weird news at that).

 

[Mark_88]

Good link...its been a while since I read anything on those systems but good to have information that explains what it needs...

This is what took me so long to do my engine/frame/dash swap...there was always something I had to adjust or consider in all the options and what is best/easiest to do. At one time I had a 1992 Ranger with the 3.0 with 300K on the clock that ran like a top...and I got the whole truck for $400 so I couldn't resist...ended up scraping the 3.0 but used the fenders, box and front end on my 88...it only added a week to the overall time...lol.

I'm not sure about the EGR on that year...I can check the online manual for that information...can't recall ever even seeing an automatic 2.3 in that year...but the online manual might shed some light on that..

EDIT: It may be that the automatics don't have an EGR but the online manual lists both EGR and DPFE removal steps...and right at the top it states that all engines were equipped with the DPFE...not sure what that means so maybe useless information...

 

[kishy]

93 EVTM does not show a DPFE on the 2.3 for any reason, at all. But keep in mind my engine is a 95+ design (no dizzy hole, revised oil pump, and has F5 part numbers on it) setup for 94-spec EEC-IV. So...yeah.

93 EVTM also indicates EVR + EVP (therefore the EGR valve itself also) are only present on manual trans trucks.

Engine bay pic I found here: http://www.therangerstation.com/forums/showpost.php?p=875561&postcount=12
Shows the upper intake is designed differently...there is no leg kicking out for the EGR to mount on at all (you would see it "wrapping around" behind the TPS).
Unless that guy happened to take a grinder to his upper intake, that means indeed...some had no EGR at all. Weird.

This: https://www.yourmechanic.com/questi...ve-on-my-1993-ford-ranger-v6-4-0l-by-daniel-m
Suggests even the 4.0 in 93 didn't have an EGR unless it was a CA emissions truck.

Doesn't really pose an issue for me, just a weird observation. My computer is from a manual truck, it expects to see an EVP (not a DPFE - contrary to much on the internet, these terms do not interchange), and my engine has an EVR mounted on it and the intake 'leg' to bolt the EGR onto...should be easy enough. Wiring is fun.

Nice high res pic (close to scan quality) of the EEC-IV pinout for a 93 2.3: https://i.imgur.com/X2tuIBI.jpg

 

[Mark_88]

Ah, OK...that makes more sense. For some reason I thought the engine was a 93...maybe that was the first one you were looking at...or was it 94?

I've been reading three different build threads to boot so it gets confusing...

 

[kishy]

Ah, OK...that makes more sense. For some reason I thought the engine was a 93...maybe that was the first one you were looking at...or was it 94?

I've been reading three different build threads to boot so it gets confusing...

Ha. I'm even losing track.

The engine is wired like a 94.
The body harness and ECM I got at the junkyard are from a 93.

I had figured 93/94 were functionally identical, and well...they are...but EGR changed from EVP to DPFE from 93 to 94, hence the issue.

I am therefore changing the 94-wired engine to be more 93-like, to play nice with the other stuff.

Just spent some time studying the EVTM a bit more. Looks like 15, possibly 16 wires that need connections through the firewall. I'm hoping most of those are already exposed in the 85 harness so I don't have to fish around under the dash too much.

 

[kishy]

Quick note...the DPFE connector on the harness is wired to the same ECM pins as an EVP would be. 26 Reference Voltage, 27 EVP Sensor Input, and 46/49 Signal Return. So all I'll need to do on that front is splice on the EVP pigtail instead of the DPFE one and that'll be in business pretty easily.

I came up with this reference as I dig through the wiring. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1D1yYnpxD8xAzGzVuzE_R2OeaXA6W447Rn5ArDgqtBpU

It will evolve further as more progress is made.

 

[Mark_88]

Cool! As long as the voltages in and/or out mean the same thing to both devices...you're in business...

Good work!

 

[kishy]

Yep, should be straightforward.
It is unclear to me whether the signal output of the DPFE is the same as the EVP...I tend to doubt it is, and a computer designed for one will not understand the signal from the other.

Since the computer expects EVP, I'll give it an EVP.

Another little finding...

1993 EVTM shows the clutch position switch/clutch safety switch as a single unit containing 3 electrical switches operated together, but electrically isolated:

Normally open (closed with pedal down):
1 - Joins the Start output (R/LB) from ignition switch to the starter relay (R/LB)
2 - Joins ECM pin 30 (LB/Y) to ECM pin 46/49 Signal Return (GY/R)
Normally closed (open with pedal down):
3 - Joins output from brake light switch (LG) to the 'disable' input on the cruise module/amplifier (LG)

The clutch switch pinout is given and it has 6 contacts, one in and one out for each of the above functions. Easy.

The 85...man, the 80s EVTMs really suck compared to the 90s ones (have noticed the same with my Panthers too).

The clutch switch is mentioned on a handful of pages, each time, it is depicted as only a single switch.

In the start circuit, it shows a normally open (closed with pedal down) switch connecting "start" from the ignition switch to the starter relay.

On the Electronic Engine Control pages it shows a normally open switch connecting ECM pin 11 (W/BK) to ECM pin 46 (BK/W).

On the Speed Control page, it shows a normally closed (open with pedal down) switch connecting the output from the brake light switch (LG) to the cruise module/amplifier (LG).

Poked my head under my dash. My clutch switch has what appear to be two spots for plugs to connect to it, each with 2 wires. Only one position has a plug on it with 2 wires, the ones for the start circuit.

Start circuit is easy, no real changes needed to that on its own. But the 93 ECM expects to see when the clutch is pushed. Not sure why it needs to know that, but it wants to know it.

If the additional pair of contacts on my existing clutch switch are normally open, I'll just have to track down the connector to plug onto it and that'll be easy enough to wire. If the additional pair happens to be normally closed then it won't be usable.

Alternative is trying to mount the newer clutch switch to my 85 pedal assembly, not sure what would need to go into that.

Another alternative is changing the whole deal for the clutch switch to get a constant hot input feeding two relays,
1 - triggered by the ignition switch feeding the starter relay from the constant hot input
2 - triggered by the clutch switch, closing the circuit between ECM 30 and 46/49

The relay option is the least clean looking, but probably easiest to do. Would be cool to populate a couple of the unused spots in the underhood power distribution box.

Since a remote starter is in the plans for this truck I'll have to give this some thought. In a perfect world I'd have a true neutral safety switch, not a clutch safety switch. The TK5 has an unused switch mounted below the shift tower. If it turns out that's what it is, I'll probably completely eliminate the clutch switch right out of the picture. If that's not what that switch is, well...back to the drawing board.