1988 Ranger Restoration - Keeping a Promise

[PetroleumJunkie412]

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,

2.9L Megasquirt Info - Work in progress

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...

www.therangerstation.com

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

Really, really bad forced induction idea...

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...

www.therangerstation.com

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?

 

[Uncle Gump]

Let me help you PJ.... Fuel Injection

Specifically errrrr ummmm most likely.... the upper intake

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

Ah, OK. Hold tight.... I think there's a few threads on that...

2.9 Lower Intake Differences

Just posting a few photos showing in mild detail the differences in lower intakes. Can take more detailed shots if there's interest. Two biggest things of note are the reinforcement in the model year 1992 manifold, and the additional coolant ports in the Merkur manifold. Merkur also uses a...

www.therangerstation.com

2.9 Sierra vs. Ranger Intake Comparison - Side by Side Photos

Just thought it would be interesting to see the difference side by side. The 2.9 throttle body is the an '86 57/58 mm

www.therangerstation.com

Differences in 2.9 Twin Throttle Body Intakes

Had two European intake manifolds for the 2.9 shipped over from the UK. Just a photo thread showing differences in three different twin throttle body 2.9 upper manifolds - two generations of Euro manifolds versus the American version. Have a Merkur lower on the way (very different port shape)...

www.therangerstation.com

I should do one with the assortment of ranger high rise intakes.... I have a pile of them. They're all the same *basic* casting, but have nuances in port layout...

 

[Uncle Gump]

I hope that what he meant....

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

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.

It actually was pretty cutting edge for its day.

Or would you rather have a TBI S-10?

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

It actually was pretty cutting edge for its day.

Or would you rather have a TBI S-10?

You're absolutely correct by saying that.

.....buuuuuuuuuuut times have changed, moores law is in full effect, sooo kick that binary based ROM compooter to the curb

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

You're absolutely correct by saying that.

.....buuuuuuuuuuut times have changed, moores law is in full effect, sooo kick that binary based ROM compooter to the curb

I did... with pleasure.

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

Rods are in.

4340 steel with ARP bolts.

Next step is machining everything together...

 

[ericbphoto]

Very nice. You should cut a window in the side of the block so you can look at them occasionally.

 

[snoranger]

Very nice. You should cut a window in the side of the block so you can look at them occasionally.

Ha nice... I replied to his text with “those are too nice to hide inside a Cologne block.”

 

[G8orFord]

If it goes like I think it might, the window may not be optional.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

PJ in the near future...

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

@85_Ranger4x4 sent this to me a while back. This is the goal:

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

If it goes like I think it might, the window may not be optional.

12 valve 2.9l, 21psi, stock internals, dynos 535hp at the rear wheels

1:40 or so to be able to hear it.

 

[Ranger850]