I want to see some Ford EcoBoost and GM LS swaps

[Jim Oaks]

We've seen tons of 5.0 swaps over the years. But there are potentially better options today.

The 2.0L EcoBoost has been around since 2011. The 2011 Ford Explorer 2.0L EcoBoost produced 240 hp & 270 lb⋅ft of torque which is 30 more hp than the 210 hp 5.0L V8.

All of the parts are out there to do the swap. It's my understanding that the 2.0L/2.3L Duratec engine used in the Ranger has the same bolt pattern as the EcoBoost.

I really think it would be cool to start seeing these swaps and helping others wanting to tackle it.

I'd also like to see some good GM LS swaps. I don't care that it's a Chevy motor in a Ford truck. Hot rodding pretty much started out with people swapping motors from other vehicles.

Let's do something different.

No offense to any of you doing 5.0L swaps. Just trying to broaden the horizon.

 

[rumblecloud]

Me too. There's a group on FB for LS swaps in rangers. I joined out of curiosity
Don't judge me...

 

[Heather’s94]

A Coyote swap, maybe.

The Lincoln/Jaguar micro V8 (3.5?), maybe, okay, definitely when the neighbor kid totals her baby Lincoln. Already talked to her father about it. But Lisa or Shelby would be driving it, not me…

I have the dubious “pleasure” of owning 4 pre-LS Chevy trucks. I “would” 8.1 swap my 99 K3500 c&c dually.

I have refused several offers to buy my 85 C10 swb because the eejit told me he was going to “LS and 4L60E swap it”. I’ll push the crusher button myself before either one of those abominations gets installed. Currently swapping the factory Qjet equipped 4.3 for a Qjet equipped 350. I don’t like late Qjets, so got a manual trans/choke version early style.

If I could find the correct intake, would be running a Holley 94 or Stromberg 97 on the 2.3 in my Ranger. And a points distributor, early enough block to still support a distributor. I absolutely LOATHE fuel injection.

 

[19Walt93]

I've had two 2.0 EcoBoost Escapes with great gas mileage and zero problems but I'd use a 2.3 EcoBoost from a Mustang since they're rear wheel drive to make it easier and a little more displacement couldn't hurt.
I saw a flathead V8 swapped Pinto wagon at Carlisle a few years, with aluminum heads and 2 Strombergs it probably had a little more power than the 2.3 but it was definitely cool.
My own 93 Ranger has a carbureted, Duraspark 351 from a 95 F150.
I'd save the Chevy engines for ballast, maybe a friend with a boat could use it for an anchor if he could get the oil leaks fixed.

 

[dvdswan]

Pictures or it didn't happen.

 

[Li'l Work Truck]

I've considered doing a 2.5 swap and a supercharger, and the 2.3 out of a Focus RS would be cool, but for me that's full-on street truck territory. My friend had a FoRS with 400+ HP and 350 torque, and it would yank the sheet metal it was strapped to around like a dog with a chew toy. If the engine could be mounted transversely in a Ranger, the AWD system from that car would make the truck the fastest minitruck since the Syclone, but that's a $$$ project.

Can the M5OD even handle 400-HP launches without grenading? Are we in Tremec territory at that point?

 

[SenorNoob]

Transmissions are rated by torque capacity. Horsepower has little relevance. (Usually the transmission can spin faster than the engine.)

A quote from RonD:

1988-2011 Rangers used the M5OD-R1 manual transmission, it is rated at 330ft/lb torque

4R44E(or 5R) automatics are rated at 440ft/lb
4R55E(or 5R) are rated at 550ft/lb

You have a BW1354 Transfer case which would be good up to at least 550ft/lb, same as 4R55E automatic

All manual transmissions have lower torque rating than almost any automatic because if the "weakest link" which is the surface area of the "gears" that are driving the output shaft/drive line
Manuals just have less surface area to spread out the torque, so lower torque rating and lower towing capacity because of that

So 350 ft/lb would start eating a M5OD pretty quick I'd think...

 

[Silas Mc]

Yessir

 

[Brain75]

I don't want to be the guy who posts chatgpt every post, but I got to admit the AI when properly prompted makes me expand thinking to things I had not thought. I got to share what chatgpt had to say about 2.3 eco (cause the 2.0 eco on paper looks fine, but it doesn't have the torque curve I want for a pickup, it would turn the vehicle into a car.)... anyhow, I never would have thought a full size bronco was a better swap candidate than an explorer (which is an RBV!)... what chat gpt had to say when I said "lets look at all longitudinal mounted 2.3 ecoboosts and build a list":
I think this is exactly the right place to start. I'd ignore everything that is transverse because it immediately creates accessory drive, oil pan, transmission, and packaging problems that you don't need.
Let's build the list from the standpoint of a swapper.

Tier 1 – Best Donors (Longitudinal from the factory)​

These are the ones I'd actively hunt.

Vehicle	Years	Factory Manual?	Notes
Ford Mustang EcoBoost	2015-present	Yes (MT82)	Probably the gold standard donor.
Ford Ranger	2019-present (US)	No (US)	Excellent truck accessory layout. All US Rangers got the 2.3 EcoBoost.
Ford Bronco	2021-present	Yes (7-speed manual)	Very interesting donor because Ford engineered a manual behind the 2.3.
Ford Explorer (RWD platform)	2020-present	No	Longitudinal, but automatic only.

Already we can divide them into two very different categories.

---

Manual donors​

These are the unicorns.
Mustang
Pros

• Factory manual ECU
• Factory clutch
• Factory flywheel
• Factory pedal
• Manual calibration
• Tons of aftermarket support

Cons

• MT82
• Rearward shifter
• Passenger-car oil pan
• Accessory layout optimized for a sports car

---

Bronco​

This one intrigues me more than most people realize.
Ford spent real engineering effort making the 2.3 work in an off-road truck.
That means:

• low-end torque calibration
• truck cooling
• truck accessory drive
• manual transmission calibration

The manual Bronco uses the Getrag MT88 seven-speed (six forward gears plus the ultra-low "crawler" gear), not an MT82.
That crawler gear is useless for most street swaps, but the existence of a factory manual calibration is valuable.

---

Automatic donors​

Ranger​

This may actually be my favorite engine donor.
Why?
Because it's already a truck.
You get:

• truck oil pan
• truck accessory drive
• truck cooling
• truck exhaust routing
• truck mounts

Everything points in the direction you'd want for another truck.
Unfortunately...
Ford never sold a manual in North America.
So now you're dealing with an automatic ECU strategy.

---

Explorer​

Probably the least attractive.
It's longitudinal.
That's about all it has going for it.
Everything else is SUV packaging.

---

If I were choosing today...​

I'd honestly rank them like this.

1. Mustang manual donor ​

Best electronics.
Best documentation.
Largest aftermarket.

---

2. Ranger automatic ☆​

Best physical engine.
Worst transmission situation.

---

3. Bronco manual ☆​

Best truck calibration.
Still expensive because Broncos hold their value.

---

4. Explorer ​

Only if it fell in my lap.

 

[JoshT]

How about a first gen EcoBoost drift truck? You pay for the drivetrain and tuning, I'll figure out how to build the truck.

anyhow, I never would have thought a full size bronco was a better swap candidate than an explorer (which is an RBV!)...

Explorers WERE RBVs. They deviated from that initially in 1995 with the SLA suspension, then Ford changed the Ranger to match in '98 (was probably planned before the Explorer change). They really jumped the rails in 2002 when they got the IRS, and steadily headed in a different direction since. I can't speak for the modern Rangers, but the modern Explorer has very little in common with the RBVs of yesteryear.

 

[Brain75]

I will also throw out that if it was my swap and I could buy any vehicle out of craigslist "no title $500". I'd go with an T5 trans out of an S10 (gives you the right shifter location and chevy muncie pattern) and then a non computer chevy motor, or if I went computer at least no PATS equivalent - none of the headache of anit-theft insanity. probably a little common old chevy V6. And I hate chevy!... if I felt up for the challenge I might try to shoe horn a ford 300 straight 6 in, but that probably means relocating the radiator somewhere south of china.

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

A quote from RonD

I miss RonD...

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

or if I went computer at least no PATS equivalent - none of the headache of anit-theft insanity.

No PATS with megasquirt

Also, PATS disable is one mouse click with HP Tuners.

 

[Li'l Work Truck]

I miss RonD...

Eh? I didn't say that...

 

[SenorNoob]

I did. As a reply to you... Not sure how that happened, unless PJ is playing with the quote boxes...