2.3L ('83-'97) 2.3 Roller Camshafts Mustang vs Ranger

[PlumCrazy]

Does anyone know for certain if the 8 plug NA Mustangs and Rangers have the same cam? I have factory roller 92 Mustang head to put on my 97 Ranger (I know the valve stem/spring/follower differences), but are the cam profiles any different? Will I notice a powerband difference if I leave the Mustang cam in the head? If I don't need to swap it, I don't want to bother.

Years ago I put a Taurus short block in a Ranger and actually noticed a the powerband seemed to be shifted into the higher RPMs and I actually thought it was more drivable that way in a 5 speed truck than the Ranger low end torque profile.

 

[RobWigglezz]

Could you search for an oem part number for one of the cams and see if they match?

 

[RobWigglezz]

F57Z-6250-B is what I'm getting for 97 ranger 2.3l

 

[scotts90ranger]

You would have to do earlier years like '88-94 which I think are all the same in Rangers, they changed a fair amount of the valvetrain in '95 while switching to smaller valve stems but I've read that they kept the effective profile the same. As it turns out the guys here didn't share much about Mustang cams, at least that I paid attention to... wish I knew more when DaveR and so forth were still around so I could have understood and retained more...

 

[PlumCrazy]

Update. I just sent it with the mustang cam. I will let everyone know how it feels once I find a fuel rail that doesn't have an enormous leak. Lol

 

[scotts90ranger]

Figured you would, can't hurt to try . I'd offer one but the only one I have is the one I'm using...

Unless I get the engine from my buddy soon... If you get in a real bind I can make it happen soon, unless he's busy fighting wild fires... If I remember right what he has is a '95-97 2.3L I was going to acquire for a spare that he bought initially for a customer that backed out...

 

[PlumCrazy]

Figured you would, can't hurt to try . I'd offer one but the only one I have is the one I'm using...

Unless I get the engine from my buddy soon... If you get in a real bind I can make it happen soon, unless he's busy fighting wild fires... If I remember right what he has is a '95-97 2.3L I was going to acquire for a spare that he bought initially for a customer that backed out...

I have at least 3 95-97 Ranger cams, I was just asking if it was worth the effort to swap one into this stang head....I need a fuel fail for a 95-97 though....the original got boogered up getting the disconnect apart and the one I pulled from my V8 swap truck has a rust hole where the hard-line is welded to the rail....

Gonna try the local pull a part tomorrow and hope they have a 2.3 or 2.5 in the yard

 

[scotts90ranger]

I have at least 3 95-97 Ranger cams, I was just asking if it was worth the effort to swap one into this stang head....I need a fuel fail for a 95-97 though....the original got boogered up getting the disconnect apart and the one I pulled from my V8 swap truck has a rust hole where the hard-line is welded to the rail....

Gonna try the local pull a part tomorrow and hope they have a 2.3 or 2.5 in the yard

Yeah, I get that on the cams...

Rusted out stainless steel? I mean dang... real glad I don't live with that stuff...

Annoyingly you're probably stuck looking for a '95-97, '98 is when Ford switched to returnless so a 2.5L won't have a regulator or return...

 

[PlumCrazy]

Yeah, I get that on the cams...

Rusted out stainless steel? I mean dang... real glad I don't live with that stuff...

Annoyingly you're probably stuck looking for a '95-97, '98 is when Ford switched to returnless so a 2.5L won't have a regulator or return...

The rails are just chrome plated. The lines from the filter to the disconnect are stainless though

 

[PlumCrazy]

Update:

Day 4ish of ripping a 1997 Ranger with 31s and 4.10s with this 92ish Mustang cam and I'm loving it. It may be the same as the Ranger...but all I know is having 4 exhaust valves that actually close..really makes this truck a treat to drive. It's still a turd, but I can daily it on both freeway and back roads without causing significant traffic disruptions.

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

having 4 exhaust valves that actually close..really makes this truck a treat to drive. It's still a turd

- Ford Ranger sales brochure, page 7

 

[scotts90ranger]

I bet it helps... makes me curious what shape my '97 is in... it's cranky on startup sometimes and it shakes at idle a little but still gives me a consistent 24mpg......

Mine has 4.10's but I settled on 28" tires for drivability... If I had a T case I could live with 31's again I'm sure, I ran that setup on my '90 for a few years... Running past 60 is doable but takes some time, I don't venture up there much as I don't want the "attention"

 

[PlumCrazy]

I bet it helps... makes me curious what shape my '97 is in... it's cranky on startup sometimes and it shakes at idle a little but still gives me a consistent 24mpg......

Mine has 4.10's but I settled on 28" tires for drivability... If I had a T case I could live with 31's again I'm sure, I ran that setup on my '90 for a few years... Running past 60 is doable but takes some time, I don't venture up there much as I don't want the "attention"

This truck with 3 severely sunk exhaust valves, 3.45s, and 26s was similar. It ran 75 mph with non-issues, but you really had to baby it until the oil got warmed up. Consistently got 22-24 mph no matter how or where I drove it.

When I went to 4x4, 4.10s, and heavy 31s it became very obvious how down on power it really was. The first head I put on that was "rebuilt" still had 1.5 bad exhaust valves and it ran noticably better but had a constant valvetrain tick at all rpms and temps.

Now with this lower mileage Mustang head it will hold 75-80 again and it's quiet as a church mouse and smooth as silk

I'm very anxious to start the M62 blower project now lol

 

[scotts90ranger]

Nice, I really want to put a mild turbo on mine, just because I have most of the parts to do it... why only have one turbo ranger?