2.9 vs 3.0 tug of war.

[Mr99Ranger]

What sort of torque numbers are you pushing?

 

[Original_Ranger84]

I would say that was a pretty even match.... but if anything I think the 3.0L gained a tiny amount of ground...

 

[Mr99Ranger]

I thought the 2.9 pulled the 3.0 a little

 

[Spitfire1975]

I think the guy with the mullet wanted to pull the guy with the belly.

 

[Frank The Tank]

Tug of war being fair or not....... I will always be a fan of the 2.9 and 2.8 (just not the heads)

Frank

 

[Mr99Ranger]

Tug of war being fair or not....... I will always be a fan of the 2.9 and 2.8 (just not the heads)

Frank

 

[Andres629]

Tug of war being fair or not....... I will always be a fan of the 2.9 and 2.8 (just not the heads)

Frank

THIS.
My 92 has no problems with the heads, thanks zee lawd.

 

[adsm08]

And your 92 probably has the 89MT heads that don't crack.

 

[zukirider21]

Tug of war being fair or not....... I will always be a fan of the 2.9 and 2.8 (just not the heads)

Frank

+1!

id take a 2.9 with world heads over a 3.0 any day! although, thats not to say the 3.0's dont last. they are pretty damn bulletproof.

do the 2.8's have head issues as well?

 

[Frank The Tank]

+1!

id take a 2.9 with world heads over a 3.0 any day! although, thats not to say the 3.0's dont last. they are pretty damn bulletproof.

do the 2.8's have head issues as well?

I've never heard much about the 2.8's heads having trouble.....
I just bought a 2.9 b2 with cracked heads

I've seen b2addict allen as i know him take his 2.8 to the red-line and hold it there gear after gear in the mud-pit......... those things are tough as nails. and I got 275k out of my old 2.9, it was a trooper (trans died under it)..... between me and my brother we have 3 2.9's in the family now (1ranger mine, 1 88b2 mine, and my old 87 b2 i SOLD him, lol)

Frank

 

[zukirider21]

nice!

i've always wanted to mess with a 2.8

it seems like it would be a hell of alot easier to make more power with since theres no speed density efi to get in the way of things.

 

[Sevensecondsuv]

Trying to make power with a 2.8 or 2.9 (or a 3.0 for that matter) is an expensive, unrewarding endeavor. I mean, if you want to play with one for the novelty of it, by all means have fun and post up what you can get one to do.

But there are much more cost-effective ways to make your ranger go fast.

 

[Sevensecondsuv]

What sort of torque numbers are you pushing?

Probably a little better than 300 Ft-lbs. The acceleration is insane. You wouldn't believe a ranger could pull that hard. If I shift just right, I can pull a car length or two on a GT mustang going 0-60. After about 70 mph the awful ranger aerodynamics catch up with it and it stops accelerating quite as hard. But the thing is a blast to drive. It makes for one heck of sleeper.

 

[Original_Ranger84]

2.8L are so much fun to screw around in... they are like the 2.9L and 3.0L. Last forever but have more power down low.

My 2.8L feels way more powerful for having 30 less horse power... when it goes it goes... it doesn't go fast but it will break the 31's loose.

 

[NMB2]

I own all 3 currenly. the 2.8 is in my buggy, the 2.9 is in my 88 B2, the 3.0 is in my 98 Ranger. The 2.9 is definitly the most powerful of all 3. And all 3 have all of the standard mods, the 2.8 actually has some more extensive work.

but 3.0 vs 2.9. I would consider my 88 B2 and the 98 ranger pretty evently match for a fair comparison of motor on motor. My 2.9 destoys that 3.0 at almost any speed.

as for the tug of war, amusing to watch but proves nothing. I could hook up my buggy with the little 2.8 and I bet i can tell you who would win with almost no effort But i garuntee both of your trucks are faster than my buggy is lol.

I compared my 2.9 and 3.0 by racing them side by side and by hauling the same loads to see which stuggles more/holds speed best.

I can tell you when under load and not just racing, the gap between the 2.9 and 3.0 in my vehicles closes. The 3.0 tows just as well as my 2.9 for the most part.