2.9L in 47 chevy truck

[negative1stgen]

Hey, everyone first time on here been lurking reading lots of good info about my 87 ranger for bit now.
So I decided 87 ranger no more, classic truck with overdrive and efi yes sir. So my 2wd 87 Ranger Super cab 2.9l and TK5 manual is stripped down to drivetrain and chassis the 47 chevy cab and fenders are going on the chassis soon. oh irony a ford drivetrain in a GM lol only payback for years and years of SBCs in 32 ford coupes jk.

My question to you all the ranger 2.9 gurus, is what can I get rid of emissions wise and etc to simplify and clean up the engine bay so it looks simple enough to be in a custom pickup ie, open element aircleaner, egr delete, carbon can delete, various solenoids with wires that are redundant and can be pulled. no cats true duals, straight piped all the way back in 2" or smaller pipe. What are my best options to simplify?
thanks,
Evan.

 

[Psychopete]

88+ computer would be a good start, no EGR so that can be removed. 1 wire alternator and you can take the alternator harness out of the loop. vacuum lines to the air box and the heated air system off the exhaust manifold can be removed. really any more and you're going to have to modify the main harness, but I may have missed some.

 

[adsm08]

Open element air cleaners are hard to do on multiport EFI systems.

 

[negative1stgen]

88+ computer would be a good start, no EGR so that can be removed. 1 wire alternator and you can take the alternator harness out of the loop. vacuum lines to the air box and the heated air system off the exhaust manifold can be removed. really any more and you're going to have to modify the main harness, but I may have missed some.

Awesome, thanks for the reply I'm going to start cleaning up the engine and go through it tidying up the wiring and new engine bay soon as the cab goes on. The 88+ ECU does it plug right in the same pigtail or do I need to re pin the wires in the connecter?

Thanks,
Evan.

 

[adsm08]

You can throw an 88+ PCM right in and go. No muss, no fuss, just a few screws.

 

[negative1stgen]

You can throw an 88+ PCM right in and go. No muss, no fuss, just a few screws.

If I get a 89+ that supports a MAF. if i don't use a MAF will it throw a SES light? I might have a 90's GM MAF has anyone used one of these? would I need a MAF translator?

Thanks for your advice everyone,
Evan.

 

[adsm08]

Why are you worried about MAF? The 2.9 had MAF for like 1 year, only in California.

Unless you are actually in California in 1991 your odds of finding a MAF 2.9 computer are about as good as your odds of getting Angelina Jolie and her twin sister in bed.

 

[Psychopete]

I found a used MAF computer from Subway truck parts in Cali for a 1990 Ranger 2.9L, but this was around 9 years ago. there's no reason for it though, and if anything will add more stuff. when switching to MAF, you can get rid of the MAP vacuum line, but it's still needs to be connected electrically since it functions as a barometric pressure sensor, too.

 

[Psychopete]

IMHO you should run a set of coated pacesetters single out. the cat flange is hard to work with, I would just keep it if there's nothing really wrong with it. there's only 1 oxygen sensor, which is needed for the engine management to run efficiently; if you run strait pipes off the manifolds, I am not sure what the best way to solve this problem would be as you'd need 2 oxygen sensors for each bank.. it measures both exhaust streams where the y-pipe meets up.

 

[negative1stgen]

Why are you worried about MAF? The 2.9 had MAF for like 1 year, only in California.

Unless you are actually in California in 1991 your odds of finding a MAF 2.9 computer are about as good as your odds of getting Angelina Jolie and her twin sister in bed.

LOL, I am in CA actually there's quite a few 91-92 ranger/B2 2.9s in the junkyard around paso robles,ca. I haven't been in awhile tho hope they're still some with ECUs left. I don't know the exact years they had maf's I assumed that 89+ were all maf'd in CA?

 

[Psychopete]

I assumed that 89+ were all maf'd in CA?

don't assume, that's when you make mistakes. I would be looking to make sure it had a MAF before I pulled the ECM

 

[negative1stgen]

Found a ECU at the junkyard. part number E9TF-12A650-G1A out of a 89 bronco2 2.9 5speed 4x4 fed emissions. Does it matter 4x4 vs 2wd ECU?

 

[Psychopete]

Found a ECU at the junkyard. part number E9TF-12A650-G1A out of a 89 bronco2 2.9 5speed 4x4 fed emissions. Does it matter 4x4 vs 2wd ECU?

2wd vs 4wd doesn't matter, you're good ! just as long as the trans matches (auto vs manual)

 

[negative1stgen]

2.9L in 62' Ranchero

Update:
The 47 Chevy pickup body never made it on the ford chassis before I had it sold. So I looked around and actually picked up a 62' Ford Ranchero for $100 running and driving. So I intend on swapping in the Ranger drivetrain to replace the weak and tired falcon/ranchero drivetrain.

 

[JoshT]

Update:
The 47 Chevy pickup body never made it on the ford chassis before I had it sold.

Glad to hear it. Somebody saved that poor 2.9L from a life of ridicule and shame. Probably saved you from a death by firing squad when the chebby lovers found out what you'd done.

So I looked around and actually picked up a 62' Ford Ranchero for $100 running and driving.

You suck! Why y'all get all the good sheet metal over there on that coast? Now go find me a 63 Falcon 2-door Hardtop and a 68-72 F-100 long bed for about the same price. Wish I had time to go out there and find them, but if I did I have no place to put them and no money to put into them at current. Someday...

I want to restomod the Falcon and give to my dad. He had two of them years ago and IIRC totaled both, every time he sees a Falcon one he wants another. Don't care about finding one running, just need a solid body and complete (even if rough) interior. The plan is to install a modern drive train to it'll be a nice, reliable, efficient, low maintenance ride.

The F-100 would be for me, a replacement body for the 68 4x4 chassis dad had while I was growing up. I want a fullsize 4x4. That chassis has been sitting there waiting for some love for at least 5 years. I want to bring that old 390 back to life, with a few upgrades.

Enough of my rambling, that thing aught to look good and run good when you get done with it. That 2.9L (if it's in good shape) has as much or more horse power than the original inline 6 those cars had, just might not have as much torque.