98 2.5 to SC 3.8 v6

[ifitaintbroke]

I know it's been done, but there isn't much documentation. I already have most of the logistics figured. But I'm running into a few issues.

My first issue is the motor mounts. Using my parts system at work, I found that for an early 90's Super Coupe, a 2.3 and 3.8 use the same mounts. Interesting. I'm curious as to how and why the engine crossmember changed in Rangers, I believe that was when they went from the 2.3 to the 2.5?

My biggest concern is the electronics. I'm currently thinking that I'll have to run 2 ecms. The ecm from the Thunderbird to run the engine (duh), and the Ranger's ecm to power the speedometer and voltmeter, plus whatever else it controls. But, will the Thunderbird ecm run the Ranger tach, and coolant temp gauge?

Questions...questions...

 

[Brain75]

folks have been swapping the cologne blocks (2.8,2.9,4.0) I think from pretty much the first year to the last year of the "classic" ranger (before they were killed off due to CAFE and then reintroduced 8 years later) So while the crossmember changed I don't think it was anything insurmountable from 83-11.
Even though the Lima blocks evolved and the 2.3 disappeared I don't think there would be anything to stop a guy from putting a 2.3 in a much newer ranger so again 3.8 would work simple there.

I was thinking your biggest hurdles would be finding a SC 3.8 and a non SC newer 3.8 and getting the newer computer (OBD2 and PATS) to treat the SC right. I would even think maybe instead just taking a megasquirt to it and forgetting Ford's computer. (since they didn't do SC in the newer years with the fancier computer wizardry)

 

[ifitaintbroke]

@Brain75

I get it, everyone recommends the Megasquirt system, but I have zero interest in going that route. None. It is far too expensive, and would likely cost close to $1K before it was usable. I'm not a computer guy. I'm a wiring guy. Yes, it will be difficult to find a complete Super Coupe engine and ecm/harness, but, like I said, I'd be willing to go n/a if I have to. That really might be more reasonable anyway. I'm also pretty dead set on using an OBD2 system in order to keep using the fuel economy tuner I already have that works fantastic. Maybe a Mustang 3.8 would be a better choice. They were no slouch on power, from what I understand. If a similar year Mustang ran the speedometer and tach the same way, I might be able to ditch the Ranger ecm and just use that...

Good possibilities...

Research here I come!

 

[SenorNoob]

If you're going to be making adjustments for the supercharger anyway, why does the control system have to be from a 3.8? The 4.0 is similar enough that it uses the same MAF in the early years. Maybe a 98 Ranger 4.0 system? That way you know it'll handle everything else just fine.

 

[ifitaintbroke]

@SenorNoob

Hmm.. that is some thinking that I LIKE!

This is why I love Ford guys. They actually can think!

I'd love to do that if it would work. I'd much rather have a SC 3.8

The only thing that is unique to it is the "supercharger bypass solenoid". Whatever that does. That sounds like a great option, and I wonder if a Ranger harness could also be used, with modifications, of course.

 

[SenorNoob]

Are you looking at 89 diagrams? Cause a quick google says that was only used on 89 supercoupes to prevent boost when in reverse...

 

[ifitaintbroke]

Are you looking at 89 diagrams? Cause a quick google says that was only used on 89 supercoupes to prevent boost when in reverse...

Then it isn't needed. Come on, aren't there times when you'd need boost in reverse?

I think this is feasible. I just got complete diagrams for the Super Coupe, and for a 98 Ranger 2.5, and 4.0

I'll be mapping this out while I search for a Super Coupe engine. If I can find an engine, I'll build a run stand and have it running before going through the trouble of putting it in. Only found 2 within reasonable distance.

 

[ifitaintbroke]

Looking at the diagrams, this may be pretty easy. Just changing some connectors for the most part. Fuel injectors should be plug and play, and I'll just use a 4.0 coil and ditch the 3.8 ICM. Firing order is the same IIRC. However, there are a few issues:

Crank sensor: 3.8 has 4 wires, 4.0 has 2. Not sure what the difference is in function. It may be possible to just not use the extra 2 wires.

EDIT: Solution: use a 4.2 crank sensor, which will plug into the ranger harness.

MAP: 4.0 doesn't have one, so I guess I can just leave that unplugged.

IAC: Has different colored ecm wires, so maybe it isn't calibrated the same. That could be a problem.

Cam sensor: 3.8 has 4 wires, 4.0 has 3. None of them are the same colors. Not sure if they have different functions or what. This could be a serious hurdle.

EDIT: Solution: cam synchronizer and sensor from a 4.2

Another thought: the diagram I'm using is for a 1993 Thunderbird, which has EEC-IV. Maybe if I got 1995 sensors (EEC-V) they would be closer to what I need. I'll get that diagram too next time I'm at work.

 

[Brain75]

... I'm also pretty dead set on using an OBD2 system in order to keep using the fuel economy tuner I already have that works fantastic. ...

So here is where I think finding an OBD2 in a super charged 3.8 might be next to impossible. The 10th generation Thunderbird super coupe was the last one to get the supercharge engine right - well Ford killed it in 1997, and OBD2 was started in 95/96/97 depending on when Ford decided to add it to a specific model. Did Ford change the OBD1 T-bird into OBD2 for one more year before killing it off? - can you find that one or two year t-bird with the super charger? (it was an option).
I would hazard a guess that the two you found close are not the very last year and so not OBD2. Without a good computer to start with you are basically starting from scratch unless

... The 4.0 is similar enough that it uses the same MAF in the early years. Maybe a 98 Ranger 4.0 system? That way you know it'll handle everything else just fine.

If that is true and a 4.0 computer doesn't have a drastically different table than the 3.8 (one's a cologne block the other's an essex so they share very little in common from my eyes - but if the tables are close enough).
Compression ratio was lower in the supercharged 3.8 so how would that affect the computer tables (not to mention what does the supercharge itself do to the computer tables)?

If you abandon the supercharge 3.8 and get just a "regular" 3.8 those were used in the Windstar up till 2003 - so you can find an OBD2 computer for a plain ole 3.8 pretty easy - I think I can walk you to at least 1 in the junkyard closest to me. FWIW as far as swapping engines those same models Windstars also used the 3.0 vulcan (exact same engine in a Ranger) - so the engine mount points have to be similar if not the same as the Ranger. The Aerostar is technically a RBV (Ranger Based Vehicle) and the Windstar is an evolution of the Aerostar - don't know how much they changed in that redesign.

 

[Brain75]

here's a lookup for you on your parts system.... lookup to see what motor mounts are used in a 2003 Windstar for both the 3.0 and 3.8. If they are the same, then you could probably get motor mounts for a 1998 Ranger 3.0 and they will work for your swap.

 

[ifitaintbroke]

@Brain75

I'm trying as hard as possible not to ditch the supercharger. I really want it., but I have to I will. My next option would be a 99 mustang 3.8

 

[ifitaintbroke]

here's a lookup for you on your parts system.... lookup to see what motor mounts are used in a 2003 Windstar for both the 3.0 and 3.8. If they are the same, then you could probably get motor mounts for a 1998 Ranger 3.0 and they will work for your swap.

Excellent! That's brilliant! I wonder if fwd and rwd 3.8s have the same mounting points. I'll bet they do. It would have been pointless to change that when they were making different mounts anyway.

Another thing. If I REALLY want a supercharged 3.8, can't I just add a blower later? And, realistically, I might find myself satisfied with a n/a 3.8

 

[Brain75]

another source for 3.0 vs 3.8 is the ford taurus. I am fairly sure my mom had both a taurus (92) and a sable (mercury badged taurus 02) and the first was the smaller motor and the 2nd was larger motor...
edit: looking at engine options in wiki though they most likely both had the vulcan 3.0

 

[ifitaintbroke]

another source for 3.0 vs 3.8 is the ford taurus. I am fairly sure my mom had both a taurus (92) and a sable (mercury badged taurus 02) and the first was the smaller motor and the 2nd was larger motor... which exact motors were the "smaller" and "larger" are a total ancient history no chance to remember exercise for me though.

Yes, they briefly made an "HO" version of the 3.8 for the Taurus.

 

[Brain75]

yeah neither of her tauri were SHO's, but my boss in my first job out of college had a taurus SHO - never looked under the hood.