2.8 l performance ?

[chayse brooks]

Is there any performance parts the 2.8 l that are worth getting and if so what's a good combination to build power and retain some mpg

 

[fastpakr]

Long ago there was the option of an Offenhauser intake with a Holley 390 4 barrel and a decent cam. To be honest, I'm not sure if those parts exist anymore. For the same time and money, you'd be better off swapping to a 4.0 at this point (IMO, of course).

 

[RonD]

The Holy Grail of all automotive manufacturers, more power with better MPG.

Good read here on the 2.8l and it lists some upgrade parts for more power: http://www.therangerstation.com/tech_library/2_8L_Performance.shtml

The power any gasoline engine generates is directly related to how much air it can pump thru it.
Gasoline Engine needs 14:1/air:fuel ratio to run, this is by weight not volume, so 14lbs of air needs 1lb of gasoline added for engine to run.
This is why "pre-vaporizers" and 200 MPG carbs would never work, some Laws you can break, Laws of Physics are just plain hard to get around.

A 5.0l engine can generate more power than a 4.0l because.....................it can pump more air thru, 1liter more air per cycle.
A turbo or super charger gives an engine more power because................it Forces more air thru the engine.

More air = more gas, so more power.
More gas also means less MPG

A better carb for your 2.8l would probably be more efficient, you may be using more gas than you need to, this doesn't give more power, actually less power, and it is wasted, so better carb could mean better power and better MPG, win-win.
With carbs some of the fuel will end up on the sides in the intake, fuel injection at the intake valves eliminates that, but if you port and polish the intake you reduce the eddies and rough air flow in the intake which lessen the amount of wasted fuel and can increase performance, another win-win.

Electric radiator fan frees up a few horse power.
Belt driven fan runs all the time whether you need the cooling or not, fan clutch helps but fan is still a drain on the horse power.
E-fan is also a win-win, more power better MPG

 

[chayse brooks]

So which would be the better route for me as I drive this truck a distance of 60 miles and back every week. I've heard that if I want decent mpg and more power a 2.3l turbo would be the best. But then I have heard to to go with the 4.0l and some have just said to swap a 302 in. I'm not looking for massive gains in power just something to get me to 60 mph faster and not have to do 45 up an 8 mile hill in 3rd gear

 

[fastpakr]

Before you consider anything else, are you sure the truck is actually running properly? If not, you may find you're completely content with the power once it's in working order.

 

[chayse brooks]

Well it does have some carburetor problems with it having some play and I had to replace a bunch of vacume lines that leaked. Speaking of which is it smart to take off the smog stuff and get it running with out it. I've heard that that takes up some power. The engin is also coated in a film of oil but that's getting cleaned off as soon as it warms up out side

 

[fastpakr]

Properly working, the TFI/EEC-IV system wouldn't generate any less power than the earlier Motorcraft 2150/Duraspark system, but the older version is certainly easier to troubleshoot. If you can't figure out the vacuum/electronic rats nest that you're staring at now, switching over might be a good option to consider. I did it on my '84 and was happy with the result.

 

[chayse brooks]

Thanks and yea rats nest is a good word to call it it was a mess when I picked up this truck and where could I find the parts to switch over

 

[kimcrwbr1]

You can do the duraspark conversion and bring that engine to life again. Eliminate the computer harness and all the vacuum lines. Get the distributor and module I got my harness out of a 1984 2.0 ranger for the distributor. If it is a 1983 or 84 it is pretty much plug and play. I only had to splice one wire and had it running. You can use that carb just get some #42 jets and a rebuild kit.

 

[RonD]

Well it does have some carburetor problems with it having some play and I had to replace a bunch of vacume lines that leaked. Speaking of which is it smart to take off the smog stuff and get it running with out it. I've heard that that takes up some power. The engin is also coated in a film of oil but that's getting cleaned off as soon as it warms up out side

Unless you have an air pump the "smog stuff" doesn't take away power.
EGR system actually allows more advanced timing(more power) without pinging on regular gas.

 

[kimcrwbr1]

http://www.autozone.com/ignition-tu...6-cylinders-s-2-8l-2bl/700864_276632_0_17451/
If you can find a late 70s pinto, capri or mustang II with the 2.8 you can scavage the parts from?

 

[kimcrwbr1]

The EGR system on these motors is what usually fails first and constantly puts the computer in limp mode, and it runs on base timing with zero vacuum advance. If you dont need to pass smog the mechanical/vacuum advance distributor is the only other option.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

You can do the duraspark conversion and bring that engine to life again. Eliminate the computer harness and all the vacuum lines. Get the distributor and module I got my harness out of a 1984 2.0 ranger for the distributor. If it is a 1983 or 84 it is pretty much plug and play. I only had to splice one wire and had it running. You can use that carb just get some #42 jets and a rebuild kit.

Pretty much any duraspark harness will work, I used one off of a 400 V8. Made the wiring for my 302 swap plug and play

If you do ditch the smog pump a power steering belt for a non-ac truck fits the alternator side perfect.

I acquired a 1.08 venture 2150 with a 302... people wonder why they made no power in the 70's. So don't limit yourself to v6's when trawling JY's carb shopping.

 

[kimcrwbr1]

Those 302s did get pretty good mileage on the open road. 85ranger4x4 did you put the smaller jets in your carb? My experience was night and day going from #50s to #42s especially on the upper end performance.

 

[4x4prepper]

> So which would be the better route for me as I drive this truck a distance of 60 miles
> and back every week.

That is not a lot of miles, so as for ROI you probably want to keep it as cheap as possible.

What do you get for MPG?

What do you have for tires? Did you put on P235s ?

If you have a 2x4 and you have 3.45 gears, I would look for a 4.10 rear axle to swap in, as the cheapest upgrade as long as the truck is in good running condition.