2.9 turbo vs. v-8

[adsm08]

I want a turbo 2.9.

 

[noahkenny]

I want a turbo 2.9.

I like turbo motors. Back in the 90s a friend of mine had a 1988 pontiac sunbird with a 2.0l turbo if I recall correctly. It was a little slow out of the hole due to turbo lag but when that sucker got spooled up about a 30 mph kick it would just about hang with the 5.0l fox body mustangs. A real sleeper of a car. Would surprise the hell out of you. Had a pretty bad torque steer though. Almost enough to lose it if you werent ready for it.

 

[--weezl--]

Thats essentially the point I was going to make. The Ranger I had with it's 3.0 got roughly 15 city and 20 highway, whereas my dad's Marquis with it's 2ton+ curbweight and it's bigger V8 got a few miles more per gallon.

that doesn't seem that heavy... my ranger is 2.3tons

i'm not uncalm i'm just tired of every ****ing thread i see related to 2.9 performance turning into everybody parroting the same 'swap in a 4.0 or a v8' line, those swaps are ****ing boring.

i know i'm a little late... but what about a 5.0 turbo?

 

[4.0B2]

what about a dual turbo ecoboost in a first gen ranger!

 

[Mac]

that doesn't seem that heavy... my ranger is 2.3tons
What kind of coversion table to you guys use up there?
i know i'm a little late... but what about a 5.0 turbo?

what about a dual turbo ecoboost in a first gen ranger!

Really great ideas guys but on a buget for a DD? Don't think that's what he's looking for.
Dave of the Nord

 

[--weezl--]

i used the Convert! app for my phone, and a scale that said i was 2100 kilos (4600 lbs, 2.3 short tons)

 

[adsm08]

i used the Convert! app for my phone, and a scale that said i was 2100 kilos (4600 lbs, 2.3 short tons)

That's GVRW. What the manufacturer says the truck weighs fully loaded to it's rated capacity.

The vehicle's actual weight is the curb weight, about 500lbs less, making it 1.9 tons.

 

[--weezl--]

no... i drove my truck onto a scale, the scale told me i weigh 2100kg... that is curb weight

 

[BlueChariot]

that doesn't seem that heavy... my ranger is 2.3tons

My point was that the 2ton+ car, which is heavy as hell for a car these days, with a noticeabley larger V8 in it got better mileage than the truck with a 3.0. The comparison is clear cut and impressive in my eyes.

Just for clarification, curb weight is the vehicle with all fluid topped off to appropriate levels, full tank of gas, no passengers or cargo. So unless you met that criteria, your number was in the ballpark but not fully accurate. Also, any modifcations could alter weight.

 

[boosted2.3]

no reason you can't turbo a 2.9, no reason at all.

if that's what you want to do, don't let the naysayers stop you.

a turbo 2.9 will outperform a turbo 2.3 ten times out of ten.

I'll put my 2.3T up against a 29 any time. and get 29 mpg as I blow by him.

 

[boosted2.3]

that doesn't seem that heavy... my ranger is 2.3tons



i know i'm a little late... but what about a 5.0 turbo?

did he say his ranger weighed 2 or 3 tons???

 

[--weezl--]

My point was that the 2ton+ car, which is heavy as hell for a car these days, with a noticeabley larger V8 in it got better mileage than the truck with a 3.0. The comparison is clear cut and impressive in my eyes.

fair enough, i'm just saying that our trucks DO weigh a little more than that, but i hear ya... and i totally agree, a 2 ton car is a heavy ass car now a days... the power vs weight thing hugely comes into play for fuel economy... look at the fox bodied mustangs, the 5L version was better on gas than the 4cyl's by a good number... 5th gear in my 5L to maintain 100km/h (52ish mph) i used the smallest amount of throttle i could possibly push, while still pushing, 1/8" or something? though the 5th gear was .68 and my rear was 2.73... i was running like 2000rpm

Just for clarification, curb weight is the vehicle with all fluid topped off to appropriate levels, full tank of gas, no passengers or cargo. So unless you met that criteria, your number was in the ballpark but not fully accurate. Also, any modifcations could alter weight.

yes i agree, i wasn't saying curb weight though, i was calling it actual road weight, i had full fluids, full gas, driver, 1 passenger, (i was about 210lbs, my passenger was about 180lbs plus 3 snowboards cargo (maybe 20 lbs total) so we were running approx 400 lbs total weight in the vehicle on top of curb, which is roughly .2 tons, so 2.1 curb, modifications i have to the truck shouldn't add weight to it... any mods are more replacement weight (remove the same as add)

did he say his ranger weighed 2 or 3 tons???

no, where did i say he said that? i said MY ranger weighed 2.3 tons, but i will say it now, how much lighter do you think the previous generations weighed? i'll bet his ranger weighs around 2 tons

 

[BlueChariot]

I think curb weight for my Vic and my dad's Marquis is somewhere around 4,350 lbs (1,973 kg). Mine has the 5.0, his the 4.6mod, and considering both regularly get low/mid 20's in highway mileage they both do good with what they've got.

I just mentioned the mods possibley addign weights because I was too lazy to read thru your build to see if you may have added weight. It was worth throwing out there seeing as alot of people on here like to add bumpers, winches, tire carriers, bigger tires (and therefore some weight), larger engine swaps, so on and so forth.

 

[adsm08]

no... i drove my truck onto a scale, the scale told me i weigh 2100kg... that is curb weight

Wow. Didn't think they were that heavy.


Then again, I know a guy with a F-100 that can't legally drive his truck. He put a bigger engine and 4x4 in it and now the truck's curb weight is only 50 lbs under it GVWR. He gets in it and it's over weight.

 

[4.0B2]

Really great ideas guys but on a buget for a DD? Don't think that's what he's looking for.
Dave of the Nord

Wait? There's a point to this thread still???? Lol I thought it was an argument on if a turbo 2.9 would work...