conveting a 86 ranger to a 91

[Dusty_Ranger]

so im going to the junkyard in the next few weeks to get a complete interior, computer, engine and dash wiring from a 91 ranger 2.9 to put in my 86 2.9 so i will essentually have a 91 ranger in a 86 cab, so my question is to keep the costs down i was wondering if a ranger MAF is the same as a explorer MAF cuz if it is i can drop 100$ of my expenses as i already have a MAF from a 91 explorer. any insight would help thanx guys

 

[MrE_Powers]

might just be me but i love the 1 gen rangers look better then gen 2s but what ever makes you happy

 

[adsm08]

The 4.0 has a bigger TB than the 2.9. If you try to put a 4.0 MAF on a 2.9 it's gonna cause some problems.

It might work, but I wouldn't be in a hurry to try it.

 

[Dusty_Ranger]

ok thanx, MrE_Powers: im only changing the interior lol i like the front end on the GEN 1's better but like the second gen interiors

 

[AllanD]

so im going to the junkyard in the next few weeks to get a complete interior, computer, engine and dash wiring from a 91 ranger 2.9 to put in my 86 2.9 so i will essentually have a 91 ranger in a 86 cab, so my question is to keep the costs down i was wondering if a ranger MAF is the same as a explorer MAF cuz if it is i can drop 100$ of my expenses as i already have a MAF from a 91 explorer. any insight would help thanx guys

IF you are going to all the work to "upgrade" to 1991 sticking with a 2.9 is ... well... stupid.

And if my saying that offends anyone tell me in person or suck it
up and keep it to yourself.

If you wanna use an Explorer MAF use the explorer ENGINE with it.

The 4.0 is everything that every 2.9 wants to grow up and be.

Doing all the work you are describing and STAYING with a 2.9 is simply
insane.

Because the difference between what you propose and doing the additional work of switching to a 4.0 at the same time is literally trivial.


AD

 

[Dusty_Ranger]

thats nice

 

[Dusty_Ranger]

btw im sticking with the 2.9 if that offends anyone suck it up and keep it to yourself

 

[AllanD]

what I'm saying to you is that you are proposing doing an awful lot of
work for what ammounts to be a purely cosmetic outcome.

And the 2.9 isn't a reliable enough engine to be worth the "loyalty" you seem to want to invest in it.

AD

 

[Tee Rev]

In 1991 the 2.9L was still using a Speed density ECU, except for the 2.9L's destined for California. They were the only 2.9's required to have a Mass air ECU in 1991. If the 91 you're swapping parts from is a Canadian Ranger, you don't need a MAF sensor.

 

[retep88]

I know it's been said on here many times before, but the performance upgrade for the 2.9 is the 4.0

 

[trail B2]

I agree with Alan D about the 4.0 drive around the block with a 4.0 and you'll throw that 2.9 right out on the ground but the fun part bout building these is your opinion is the only one that counts.

I also agree with you about the interior I cheerfully put in the second gen dash and seats it really helped with the transformation. Gen one dashes are hokey not hokey cool like say a FJ40 dash but 76 single wide hokey.

 

[Dusty_Ranger]

dont need a 4.0l so im sticking with the 2.9

 

[Kona]

btw im sticking with the 2.9 if that offends anyone suck it up and keep it to yourself

hahahahahaha :d

 

[Dusty_Ranger]

hahaha

 

[2.9XLT]

Lol.

I don't even see the point of converting a gen 1 to gen 2 in the first place. If you want a later one that bad just sell yours and buy one. They're everywhere.