2.8L 171 "Pinto" motor questions

[popbumper]

Hi all:

I am a member of the Ford Pinto community at www.fordpinto.com. I have "crossed over" here to hopefully get some pertinent answers from you folks who are familiar with the 2.8 V6. While I >have< asked about it on the other group, there seems to be little support for it.

First, I >assume< that a '78 Pinto V6 2.8 (171 CID - engine in question - I have access to one) is basically the same motor that is used in the early Ranger. If it is NOT, please let me know.

My intent: Pull the 2.3L four from my '76 wagon and install a modified 2.8. Why?
1) Don't really want to build a 4 - can't achieve the HP goals, and want something different. Not interested in a turbo 4.
2) Want to do the V6 because, like the Pinto, it's SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
3) The V6 is a direct swap in, no messing with Mii motor mounts, welding other brackets, etc.
4) It appears to me that there are plenty of aftermarket V6 goodies - which is good.

Can anyone confirm for me that this >is< the place to ask questions? I hope not to intrude, I know you guys are into a whole different set of vehicles, but I hope I can glean some info about the 2.8. THANKS for what you can tell me, and for your patience.

Chris

 

[FrankBoss]

Chris
If I was you I would look over the tech library
http://www.therangerstation.com/tech_library/index.php
its full of the good stuff including comparisons of engines threw out the years.

FrankBoss

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Here is our sites write up about the mighty (hehe) 2.8.

http://www.therangerstation.com/tech_library/2_8L_Performance.html

When it is all said and done there is probably more stuff available for a 2.3 than a 2.8, which in factory Ranger trim only pumps out 110hp. Probably a tad more with a non feedback carb and duraspark ignition.

At least with Rangers, the 2.8 takes different engine mounts and transmission bellhousing boltpattern than the 2.3, so I would assume that you would need to find 2.8 mounts and transmission for your Pinto as well.

I actually orderd the distributer for a '78(I think) Pinto when I Durasparked my Ranger. At least that much is the same for sure, it works great.

 

[Roger]

I've wondered about something sort of related... If the 2.8 and 4.0 share bellhousing patterns, will the 4.0 bolt in with the 2.8 engine mounts? Seems to me, a 4.0 Pinto would be the hot ticket. And, it would be different! (I'm a Pinto fan myself)

 

[popbumper]

I've wondered about something sort of related... If the 2.8 and 4.0 share bellhousing patterns, will the 4.0 bolt in with the 2.8 engine mounts? Seems to me, a 4.0 Pinto would be the hot ticket. And, it would be different! (I'm a Pinto fan myself)

That's a GREAT question - hope someone will chime in. THANKS for the replies so far!

Chris

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

That's a GREAT question - hope someone will chime in. THANKS for the replies so far!

Chris

Both 4.0 swap writeups in the tech library say to use the 4.0 mounts.

And even though they will bolt up I wouldn't use a 2.8 or 2.9 transmission with a 4.0. They could barely handle what they were attached to from the factory.

http://www.therangerstation.com/tech_library/4L_Conversion.html

http://www.therangerstation.com/tech_library/4L_Conversion2.htm

 

[Jim Oaks]

What year Pinto do you have and what transmission is in it?

 

[popbumper]

1976 wagon, MPG version, C4 manual tranny, loaded with plenty of emissions junk

Really having a hard time deciding which direction to go - built up 4, built up
V6, small V8.

Know most of the advantages/disadvantages of each.
>4 cyl takes a lot of work and $$ for HP. Don't want turbo, don't want to transplant a computer and harness. Easy drop in, though.
>>I would have to find another motor to rebuild or pull mine and keep the car down for a few months

>6 cyl has better torque figures, can go dual exhaust, but head work is doubled. Not as many toys available. Would require another tranny to bolt up to. Easy drop in, though.
>>I know of a 2.8 171 out of a '78 2-dr in a local yard, was running when car parked in April, seems like a good donor, <$200. Could build on side.

>8 cyl - LOTS and LOTS of aftermarket stuff, 302/289 are easy to source, stock motor would be instant HP, but have to mess with motor mounts, radiator location, potentially hood changes, car would be heavy on the front end.
>>I would have to find another motor to rebuild on the side

That's why I am looking at all possibilities.

Chris

 

[Mutant Pony]

I am also a member at www.fordpinto.com. Same name. You can p.m. me anytime for questions on either site.
The 2.8 is NOT a dirrect swap. A Ranger 2.8 will not bolt right in.
You need MANY parts from a 2.8 Pinto, Many of the parts you need will fit from Mustang IIs.
Once you have all the parts that you need to put a 2.8 in your Pinto, a 4.0 could be bolted right in.
A 2.8 is NOT capable of making more HP or TQ than a 2.3. Because of aftermarket support, the 2.3 can even be built to outperform the 4.0. The 4.0 will make more HP/TQ at a lower RPM though.

 

[mentalbreakdown00]

the 2.3 will do more for you on a budget than you think, theres a reason why most pure stock mini's run 2.3's

 

[FrankBoss]

I guess the question is the MustangII and Pinto 2.8 the same platform as the Ranger 2.8? of course mounts and pan would be different...

FrankBoss

 

[Mutant Pony]

2.6, 2.8, 2.9 and 4.0 are all Cologne engines. Built in Cologne Germany. All the Ford 2.8s do interchange with the proper bolt ons.
If it is a c4 in the car, you only need to replace the bell housing and torque converter. Not the whole trans.

 

[martin]

It might be worth mentioning that while any of the v6's could be mechanically installed without too much trouble the 2.8 can be run with a minimal of wiring for ignition, mechanical fuel pump and carburetter. The 4 liter requires much of the electronics that came with it to make it run. You could always megasqirt it though. Still a bunch of electronics but fairly straightforward wiring, tuning is another story.