Best Donor for non-Ford project

[Bgeddes]

Plan is to build a new '40s Jeep. Lots of great parts out there but for the engine, more knowledge is needed.

Father-in-law drove Rangers, both big and little, for years. The later, were incredibly good. An '88 he had ran like a top at 200K miles. Research has led me to understand that the better motors are single plugged from somewhere in this era? or is this wrong?

Ideally, FI would be nice, unless it involves an overly complicated wiring setup. A handful of wires is no big deal but creating a custom harness, not so much.

So please, if you will allow this Jeep guy here, please afford me some advice on a donor. The plan is to find a frame & body rot rig. No interest in hacking up a quality piece.

 

[Mark_88]

For simplicity I would suggest getting a carbureted 2.0 from 1988 or 1987...but they may have only been sold in Canada for those two years...I know I've seen a few people on here with those years in the US...They are as simple a wiring job as can be and are generally very reliable...a bit harder on gas.

Fuel injection route I'd say find a 98-2001 2.5 engine...you can actually run them with the earlier Fuel injection systems from 1989 upward...as 89 was the first year for the Distributorless Ignition System (DIS)...

Transmissions are best using the M5OD unless you want a automatic...in which case you might consider a different engine unless you are going to buy a new or rebuild automatic...they are not as reliable as the five speed...

I'm sure you will hear from a few others that have opinions on these things...and hopefully you can find what you want...

 

[tomw]

The old favorite for Jeeps was the Buick 231 V6. It was short and small and fit right in. There should be bell housing adapters on the market for that swap if you want to keep the original driveline.
If replacing the whole thing, and you want EFI, get a donor vehicle that is complete. To run EEC-IV, the first generation of EFI, you don't need a lot of connections.
I don't know if the 2.3 / 2.5 will fit vertically under the hood.

 

[adsm08]

I'm not a GM guy by any stretch. I consider the bench mark for a bad idea to be if GM decided it was dumb enough to stop doing, but I do have a soft spot for those 231s. I had an Olds with one in it backed up by a 350 hydro and on a hot day she'd bury the speedo and keep pushing. On a cold day she'd do 80 at 1/4 throttle. I have no idea what gears were in that car, but it would MOVE.

If you want a Ford engine I'd look into a 2.9 or a 4.0. Somewhat similar dimensions as the Buick 3.8, and simple to wire.

 

[huggyb1972]

I would stay as far away from the 2.0 as possible I had 3 of them and while they beat walking a kid on a energy drink ridding a bicycle will own you. I even went as far as a small 2bbl holley and a hooker header on one and still rarely ever got to 85mph unless the ground was flat and the wind was still.

 

[Mark_88]

That's understood...I only got decent power out of mine after a considerable investment of money and time for the P&P. But the wiring is simple and will power a 2.3 as well. It just may be easier to find a harness for them than the older carbed 2.3s.

If you want power then there are plenty of options for that...just not as compact...a turbo version of the 2.3 done right will make any vehicle a bit more fun to drive.

 

[Bgeddes]

Wow, lots of input quickly!

The Buick V6 was offered in the little jeeps, but I really don't want one (or any V6) for this project. The factory motor was ~60hp, so I was looking for 100hp. Knowing the little 2.0/2.3/2.5 platform has good aftermarket support, it seems like a good canidate.

Others have done this mod and the motor will fit under the hood. In the past, installations have canted the motor 3 or so degrees to gain a touch of hood clearance.

As far as the trans/transfer case, a Mustang bellhousing will connect the 2.x to the Jeep T90. Junkyard parts are also an attractive feature of the Ford mill.

I will have to see if I can dig into the Ford EFI setups and do my best to learn their nuances.

Thanks for the starting points, off to study and come up with more questions!

 

[huggyb1972]

The 2.3 is a easy platform to work with, and there is a good after market for them. The earlier versions with the Oval port heads were Carburated. They used them in many applications besides cars and trucks. I have one in my boat and I choose it just becase of that little motor. There were also some that were used in industrial machines we had a floor scubber that had a propane fueled 2.3. The boat motors run a Rochester 2 jet carb and you could get manifolds to even run holley 390 cfm 4bbl carbs. Fuel injection wouldn't be a major trick either a stand alone harness can be built with some good electical knowledge and schematic. I've done 2 myself but for ford Mustang v8 ' s though which aren't much different wiring wise.

 

[tomw]

Really, the only thing needed from inside for an EEC-IV EFI system the vehicle is the power from the ignition switch. All else is 'under the hood', attached to the inner fenders, or plugged into the exhaust down pipe. It can all be unbolted from the donor, actually left attached for the most part, and plopped into 'whatever'. Just give a power signal.
OOps. Forgot the ECM down in the kick panel. Take the complete harness with the computer and hide it (computer) in a box and feed the harness out, and plug it in.
Or go to a Pinto/Mustang II 2.3 with a Holley/Weber 2-bbl. Not a bad carb. Of course you'll have to look for hens teeth to find one right there alongside. Forty years ago, it was a decent product. I don't have my original, but have a 2.3 Ranger that is still kicking 30 years on, with EFI, and have the shop manuals and EVTM that will guide any fixin'.
tom