TRS 20th Anniversary
- Oct 31, 2018
- Reaction score
- Pittsburgh, PA
- Vehicle Year
- Make / Model
- Engine Size
- 2.9l Trinity
- 2WD / 4WD
- My credo
- Give 'yer balls a tug. Fight me.
Junkie, I am not an owner of a Ranger truck, But do have an Explorer I just came in possession of. It has a 4.0 OHV V6 and 5 speed tranny. It was rolled over several times and the lady that owned it sold it to a friend of mine.
I own of Chrysler vehicles, they are Sunbeam Alpines! I have one that I totally restored back in 2008-2010. Then decided to install a FORD (Cologne) 2.8 V6. Got'er done! Now I have a special project to install another Cologne designed engine in one of my rare Alpines, a '65 SIV GT that originally had a 4 cyl & Borg Warner BW35 automatic. The GT was headed to the scrap yard before I salvaged it.
I have installed the 4.0 OHV in the GT, built custom headers and designed all of the other necessities for a proper functioning Sports car.
The original fuel system has me stumped. The factory FI appears to sit a bit too tall in the car, even with a hood scoop. But, I am continuing on with my project. I have a 2.9 engine also. Looking at yours, causes me to wonder if your FI sit lower that the stock? Is it an original?
There appears to be little support for a 4 bbl intake for the 4.0 except maybe one that is extremely expensive. The carb is not really what I want. A friend of mine has spoken to me several times about a MicroSquirt application he read about perhaps here on the Ranger Station. My search for the MicroSquirt brought me to your POST! I have read lots of your comments and feel certain you can help resolve some of my questions.
Hope I am not out-of-line asking for help beings I don't own a Ranger Truck, but I do own several Chrysler products that are out of production
I have several of the 2.8's 60 degree engines, little brother to the 2.9's and the 4.0's all of which are of basic design. Heads, exhaust, valves and water pumps being the major differences. My headers designed for the 2.8 will not fit the 2.9 or the 4.0 due to the exhaust port arrangement, however the ones I have designed for the 4.0 will fit the 2.9. You might ask why no go with the 2.9? Well, my best answer, the 4.0 has all of the same configurations for installation in my Sunbeam Alpines as the 2.9.
Any help or advice will be much appreciated,
Submitting this as a placeholder for now, but posting the attachments and gist of the article. This is going to be a rather in-depth write up, and will take some time to properly compile. Mods: Please do with this as you see fit! Thank you!! CRITICALLY IMPORTANT NOTE: To those who find...
Data from my megasquirt. The difficult part may be that my 2.9 had a blown cam, so the numbers may be off quite a bit. Good news is that it's still somewhere to get started.
It's the orangedox link. I use it to track downloads. So far, well over 100 to date
Yes, this is about a 2.9L. No, I'm not just going to put a 4.0L in it. Yes I understand it's easier. Yes I understand the 2.9 is a turd. This is about feasibility, not cost and time effectiveness. ...because I like banging my head against a wall. JEEZE MOM! Ok, now that I've gotten that out...
And the thread that got the whole mess started.... There's some info on there for the megasquirt.
Cannot overstate the advantage that thing has over an EEC. Seems to me that ford really messed up with their tuning on the original systems, and that they run the pushrod cologne engines "good enough." Then again, it's 30 year old efi tech, which might as well be a few centuries old at this point.
I've read about the sunbeam conversions a few times, cool engine swap mind posting a few pics of them in frame?
What does the FI abbreviation stand for?