Quick power out of a 2.9???

[jaymegriffiths]

Kill This Thread

 

[88gt]

yo dude. i have the 2.9 in my 88 ranger and ill tell you what, it would flat get down the road. 3.73 stock gears, put a 2.5 inch exhaust on there just because i could and the fact the old exhaust literallty fell off. and a home brewed cold air intake. i had 15 inch steel wheels with 275/60/r15 tires on it and that truck would go!!!

so what oyu could do is get a newer ranger wheels with stock size tires. they will fit right in there, just be sure to get a new speedo gear that is the right teeth count so your speedo reads right. but beyond all that i just mentioned, "mods" on the 2.9 are as allenD says "mental masturbation" (hope im quoting the right dude, seen in on ppls sigs...)

 

[jaymegriffiths]

Anybody wanna tell me why it's impossible that i do a 302 swap in a 4x4? Because i'm thinking that might be fun.

Was just bein whiny. People love to twist your words around and find reasons to hate you. seems like every time i say something someones got a smartass reply to tell me im wrong. i think a 4x4 302 swap would be sweet. id love to try it but if i asked anything ill just get quoted on somethin i said months ago... its just dumb... w/e tho il figure it out

 

[Wicked_Sludge]

im not sure why you think everyone is out to get you. 4x4 302 swaps have been done over, and over, and OVER again. its not much different than doing a 2wd swap.

 

[jaymegriffiths]

im not sure why you think everyone is out to get you. 4x4 302 swaps have been done over, and over, and OVER again. its not much different than doing a 2wd swap.

first off, i dont think everyone is out to get me, just some specific people on this site seem particularily "stirred up" not saying you but some...
also, im fairly sure its considerably more complex than a 2wd swap. especially for those with little knowledge of t-case info. (ie identifying which are which, and knowing whats good, etc)
I'm more confident tackling the project with the support of trs members than just my dad. he knows what he's talking about but obviously those who have done it are going to kow more about it. i think you mentioned that you yourself have done it before and im sure you'd be willing to help me out should i get lost somewhere.Trs has been a pretty dependable source so far.i'm tryin to find a 4x4 ranger to start with now. Am havin a fun time with the one i have now...

 

[jaymegriffiths]

yea the speedometer stops at 85 mph....i had mine back to zero lol that was with stock tires on it, i need a tonneua cover for mine, so makes the truck more "airlined"

according to mythbusters it doesn't have an effect. No drag was reduced with the tailgate down. i think there test was flawed though. some people who drag race swear by it. Maybe during acceleration it helps but at highway speeds and holding a speed i has no affect. w/e they are funny lookin guys anyway i wouldn't trust em'

 

[jaymegriffiths]

OK. I believe someone mentioned something about the stock 302's having e6 or e7 heads? I talked to a mustang enthusiast in regina who specializes and 5.0 stangs, fox body and he currently has 2 explorer v8's, which according to him have the same heads as a gt40 and intake. does anyone know about this?

 

[Psychopete]

OK. I believe someone mentioned something about the stock 302's having e6 or e7 heads? I talked to a mustang enthusiast in regina who specializes and 5.0 stangs, fox body and he currently has 2 explorer v8's, which according to him have the same heads as a gt40 and intake. does anyone know about this?

Lots have E7TE heads, like my friend's '93 HO engine. My '87 Marquis engine had E6SE heads, and was a low performance version - but roller. 96-97 5.0L Explorers are GT40 heads. 98+ Explorers were GT40-P with the different spark plug angles - headers for the Ranger swap are very expensive for those heads. Or manifolds could be used.

I actually swapped GT40 heads in place of my E6SE heads on my '87 engine. Also added forged pistons, cam, and all other sorts of stuff and also had all the machine work done and it's also had some balancing. It's technically a 306ci, but it's 5.0L as far as I am concerned; even though it is going to be carbed for a while.

Pete

 

[jaymegriffiths]

Lots have E7TE heads, like my friend's '93 HO engine. My '87 Marquis engine had E6SE heads, and was a low performance version - but roller. 96-97 5.0L Explorers are GT40 heads. 98+ Explorers were GT40-P with the different spark plug angles - headers for the Ranger swap are very expensive for those heads. Or manifolds could be used.

I actually swapped GT40 heads in place of my E6SE heads on my '87 engine. Also added forged pistons, cam, and all other sorts of stuff and also had all the machine work done and it's also had some balancing. It's technically a 306ci, but it's 5.0L as far as I am concerned; even though it is going to be carbed for a while.

Pete

Actually after thinkin long and hard about the whole gutless ranger and my lack of race winning ability, I figure I'll wait for a bit, find a totalled explorer with the gt 40's buy it for like 400 bucks, take it home, rip it apart and start from scratch, buying the best of everything. Sounds like a stretch, but from what I can see, I cant afford to 302 swap before june, when I graduate and buy a newer vehicle (something more dependable) and then I'll not be dd my ranger. Maybe I'll even frame up resto it. Now that would be cool and since its in pretty awesome shape now it wont need a whole lot of work. If i find my doner sploder soon ill get to building my fire breathing 347 supercharged stroker. heck, While i have it torn apart might as well 4x4 swap it. Dreaming never hurt anyone right?
I also came up with a conclusion to my poor racing ability. I'll just race people with incredibly slow cars till then! Haha thanks for the info on years of exploders. Another question while your reading this, Is there any added difficulty with the later different angled plugs? or is it just more complex? Why is the 96-97 more ideal?

 

[Psychopete]

Is there any added difficulty with the later different angled plugs? or is it just more complex? Why is the 96-97 more ideal?

Mainly just headers, Torque monster headers for instance are expensive. But you do get what you pay for. But you could use the stock manifolds, depends on your goals and purposes.

Any later model 5.0L engine is going to be harder/complex to install due to advances in technology. The later model 5.0Ls also have a shorter front dress, which will make a world as far as the part you'd take on cooling. There's a lot of different options and ways you can mix and match stuff to make things work - like how the '96 GT40 heads bolt right on to my '87 motor. I used a "'92" front dress for under drive pullies and to make things not complicated. Even switched to a reverse rotation water pump and timing cover. Everything I've bought for my front dress just worked, but I don't have a lot of room for cooling.

96-97 GT40 heads flow more than E7s stock, they are desireable because they bolt right on and work with most headers that are already there. Not all of us have flow benches , so porting can at times cause more harm than good. And I definitely didn't want to buy E7s and had E6s, GT40 heads were the most practical for me. I picked up a set with honey comb valve springs and 1.6:1 Crane Roller Rockers for $350 off Ebay. I had a machine shop go through them and they didn't find any major issues.

Pete

 

[AllanD]

Im already running smaller than normal tires for winter and stock ones for summer, and i dont think regearing would be right, as its doing about 2400 RPM's at 110km/h sop any lower would hinder highway gas milage. Im looking for bolt on upgrades that are most effective. just curios, how did you get 3 rep power, with only 38 posts?

2400rpm at highway cruise is actually below optimum for a 2.9.

The 2.9 likes spinning at 2700-3100rpm for highway cruise.

My ranger with a 2.9 was very happy with 4.10 gears
(and 235 tires) at 75-80mph.

I upgraded power nd torque the same way Rick did, two years
ago I switched to a 4.0.

My peak mileage suffered, I could get 24mph on long highway runs
and occasionally average 26 for a tank every now and again.

Now with the 4.0 the best I can do is 22.5mph, but where the
4.0 shines is when heavily loaded, my 2.9 while towing would
drop below 12mpg, the worst I've ever gotten with the 4.0 is
just under 18mpg.


AD

 

[jaymegriffiths]

2400rpm at highway cruise is actually below optimum for a 2.9.

The 2.9 likes spinning at 2700-3100rpm for highway cruise.

My ranger with a 2.9 was very happy with 4.10 gears
(and 235 tires) at 75-80mph.

I upgraded power nd torque the same way Rick did, two years
ago I switched to a 4.0.

My peak mileage suffered, I could get 24mph on long highway runs
and occasionally average 26 for a tank every now and again.

Now with the 4.0 the best I can do is 22.5mph, but where the
4.0 shines is when heavily loaded, my 2.9 while towing would
drop below 12mpg, the worst I've ever gotten with the 4.0 is
just under 18mpg.


AD

Please. I'm consistantly getting 16.5. eveywhere. maybe 20 highway. the 4.0 is a nice option, but as i've already stated, im not interested. if i wanted a 4.0 ranger i would buy one. in the meantime, I would like to improve the 2.9 without shelling out huge amounts of dough! I cant afford to have no vehicle for more than a day, so a 4.0 swap is kinda a bad idea. once im done school and move on to a different DD, all build a serious 5.0 to put in the danger ranger. Till then its 2.9 or nothing

 

[fastpakr]

Perhaps by the time you finish school, you'll learn to listen to the advice you ask for.

 

[thundercleese]

Perhaps by the time you finish school, you'll learn to listen to the advice you ask for.

:




I suggest if you want your truck to go faster then sell it and buy another one with a bigger engine!

Plus, for the trucks sake, don't pull the engine. It's happy where it is and doesn't need someone to kill it. You would need to do tons more research before you were even close to being ready for a job like that and with what I've seen you have a lot of learning to do!

Don't be offended, I wouldn't attempt it either nor would I feel able to.

 

[AllanD]

the first thing to do with a 2.9, the VERY FIRST thing is under no conditions actually push the throttle all the way open.

The 2.9 can't actually use all the throttle it has but the signal to the computer
that the throttle is at 100% puts the computer into "open loop" and your mileage goes (literally) to-shit.

Some people (like myself) noticed that some 2.9's either didn't accelerate
any slower or actually faster if you backed off the throttle just a little bit...

Gears:
Believe me I've seen many 2.9s get better mileage with 3.73's swapped in
to replace 3.45's and a further increase with NO OTHER CHANGES by going
to 4.10's, depending on tire size.

The reason for this is that the throttle position has more of an effect
on your mileage than engine rpm.
It's about "load" with the greater numerical gears you can run with
less throttle at a higher rpm and suprising some people who don't
think it through, get better mileage.

That's the truth.

If you don't understand it I'm sorry

But this is it.

Let the engine spin at light load and don't work your throttle like a total idiot and you can get good mileage.

AD