84 bronco 2.8 c5 automatic

[rochhound]

will a 84 bronco II c5 from a 2.8 bolt to a 2.9 0r 4.0 i have one and ive heard there a lot stronger than a4ld's your opinion would be appreciated.
thanks

 

[4 bangin]

not extremely sure about the bell pattern but im pretty sure the 2.8 29 and 4.0 are all the same pattern... could be wrong.

but in my opinion a c5 is trash.. i had one behind a 302 in one of my rangers. all a c5 is , a c4 with "overdrive" its just a c4 with a lockup torque converter and a different valve body. do what you wish but do some research on this my converter locked up and started stalling my built 302 at idle (in gear) due to its low stall speed.

either way you can interchange bell housings on these trannys to make it fit pretty much anything

 

[PetesPonies]

Yes it's the same bolt pattern and no it's not trash. A C5 is the best auto that was found in the BII. a C5 can be built just as strong as a C4 if you are building a trans. I used the stgock C5 in my '84 when I installed the V8. Trash?????jeeshh

 

[alwaysFlOoReD]

Bell housing bolt patterns; Pretty much all I've read says the 2.8 is NOT the same as 2.9 and 4.0. But I don't have personal experience....more research could be in order.

Richard

 

[PetesPonies]

Engines aren't the same family but the bellhousing are the same.

 

[alwaysFlOoReD]

Thanks for the tip, I'll look into it. I have a c-5 off a 2.8 and wasn't sure what I was going to do with it as I don't have any 2.8's. I think I'll see about putting it behind my 4.0 in the race truck.

Richard

 

[Shran]

The C5 is the best automatic ever put in a RBV, IMO. If you don't like the lockup converter, I believe you can get the non-locking version (actually, from what I have heard, the non-lockup one is the ONLY one you can buy new right now.)

 

[PetesPonies]

I do not believe the C5 had a locking converter in a Bronco II. My '84 did not.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Engines aren't the same family but the bellhousing are the same.

The 2.8/2.9/4.0 are very much the in the same "Cologne" family.

I do not believe the C5 had a locking converter in a Bronco II. My '84 did not.

That is what seperates the 1980's C5 from the C4, they have an extra valve body to control the TC lockup. Replacement lockup TC's haven't been available for some time though.

http://www.therangerstation.com/tech_library/AutoTrans.html

I have heard the V6 C5 is not as strong as the V8 C4, so don't treat it as such.

 

[PetesPonies]

2.8 and 2.9/4.0 don't share many parts. Hard to call them family, even though they were designed in the same place.

As for lock up . . . . not sure what you are saying. The C5 in the BII DID NOT have a lock up feature,m plain and simple. If you are saying otherwise, you are wrong. In cars, yes it had a lockup TC, but not behind the 2.8 in the trucks.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

2.8 and 2.9/4.0 don't share many parts. Hard to call them family, even though they were designed in the same place.

As for lock up . . . . not sure what you are saying. The C5 in the BII DID NOT have a lock up feature,m plain and simple. If you are saying otherwise, you are wrong. In cars, yes it had a lockup TC, but not behind the 2.8 in the trucks.

They are an evolution of an engine that started out as a V4 and ended up a SOHC V6. They are very related, aside from bore the 2.8 and 2.9 blocks are nearly identical and the 4.0 is wider for the increased stroke. A couple years ago a guy mix and matched a 2.8 and a 2.9 to some up with something like a 4.3. It was way more work than it was worth (the different timing setup complicated things) but he seemed happy with what he did.

If you have real proof otherwise about the TC lockup you need to let the powers at be in charge of the tech library know so they can fix it. I can find no mention anywhere aside from you that it did not lock up behind a V6.

The C-5 replaced the C-4 and had a lock-up torque converter and was used in 1983 - 1984 Ford Rangers and other Fords from 1981 - 1986. In the Ranger they can be identified by transmission code 'W'. The C-5's can be identified by the hump in the oil pan.

C-5's from a 4WD Ranger are very desirable. The output shaft and tail housing can be swapped in to a C-4 for a V-8 conversion. This would same several hundred dollars buying conversion parts to install a V-8 and C-4 in a Ranger.

This transmission is almost identical to the C-4 except only for a few minor differences. The major difference between a C-4 & C-5 is in the hydraulic system. The valve body on the C-5 has several new valves and an added timing body where the filter would normally be found on the C-4. The converter relief valve has been moved from the pump to assembly reactor support to the timing valve body, thereby causing the oil pump assemblies not to be interchangeable. The 12-inch torque converter on the C-5 is a centrifugal controlled lock-up converter negating the use of electrical or hydraulic lock-up components. The lock-up mechanism is designed to engage at various predetermined speeds of the converter resulting in improved driveline efficiency and fuel economy. This type of converter is no longer available, the replacements are a called TT converters (non lock-up).

 

[PetesPonies]

Well lets see . . been teaching and working on automobiles for over 30 years in a professional venue.Have worked around many C5s, even did a drag strip trans build starting with a C5. Did a 2.8 to 302 swap in my 84 Bii. No lockup in Biis, I thought everyone knew that??

You are just wanting to be argumentative as for the family question. It is semantics possibly. Sure they were designed overseas and in the same place and possibly share some internal measurements and spacing, but if parts don't fit from one to the other, they obviously aren't the same. And that is the question people always have . . what will work from one engine to the other. Don't give them false hope.

 

[Shran]

I have heard the V6 C5 is not as strong as the V8 C4, so don't treat it as such.

From what I remember it's just missing a couple clutches or something fairly minor like that. Otherwise, apart from the valve body, they are pretty much identical. The C4 in stock form is definitely not real strong either, however, they can be built to handle some serious shit, and any of that can be applied to a C5 as well.

FWIW, a friend of mine has a C4 behind a 500hp Chevy LS1 in his crawler buggy. It has held up.

 

[PetesPonies]

THere are a couple things inside a C5 that differ from a C4, but they are replaceable if doing a performance rebuild. That would make the difference nil. Yes, clutch pack is one of them, but you need a larger drum. You just can't pack it with more clutches and call it good. But overall, compared to the crap that has been sold as automatic transmissions in the previous years through the auto industry, the C5 holds up damn well.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Well lets see . . been teaching and working on automobiles for over 30 years in a professional venue.Have worked around many C5s, even did a drag strip trans build starting with a C5. Did a 2.8 to 302 swap in my 84 Bii. No lockup in Biis, I thought everyone knew that??

I have been on this website for 11 years, I have never read anyone including our very own tech library state anything other than C5's had the lockup TC from the factory.

You are just wanting to be argumentative as for the family question. It is semantics possibly. Sure they were designed overseas and in the same place and possibly share some internal measurements and spacing, but if parts don't fit from one to the other, they obviously aren't the same. And that is the question people always have . . what will work from one engine to the other. Don't give them false hope.

They are related as in like a family but are not the same engine, that is why they are called out by different names. Just like the Windsor, Modular, Cleveland and 385 families, they are all evolutions of a base engine with varying interchangablity.