Welcome Visitor! Please take a few seconds and 
85_Ranger4x4
Wallows in rivers
TRS Event Staff
TRS Forum Moderator
Article Contributor
V8 Engine Swap
OTOTM Winner
TRS 20th Anniversary
VAGABOND
TRS Event Participant
The '94 has 3.27's, it is a turd. I don't think it would have shown my truck much with a healthy 2.8 due to gearing. Ford liked those high ratios in the '90's so chances are a "stock" OHV 4.0 will be jumping that hurdle too.
The '02 has 3.73's, it is punchy out of the hole but feels like it relies on its gearing and falls out once moving.
My Ranger also has 3.73's, The '94 and '85 have 235/75-15 tires, the '02 has 235/70-16's so they are all pretty close there. I know the Ex's are heavier than a Ranger, but I have never weighed them... or my Ranger for that matter after the swap. And like I said before, with only open headers my 5.0 has yet to venture out on the street yet so I may be skewed, also being used to a complete dog for 11 years in my truck may be messing up my butt dyno too.
'87 5.0 non-HO has 8.9:1 compression, a simple cam swap is the only difference between it and a 200hp '86 HO. If you time it right castoff HO cams can be had for free, I was crunched for time and didn't. 1.7 ratio rocker arms are good for another 15hp.
According to my books a OHC 4.0 is rated 10 hp over my 5.0 stock at a higher RPM, the 4.0 is rated lower torque also at a higher RPM. I don't have my books here with me at work for exact #'s though.
I have been watching craigslist for LS's after these debates, I have found one '02 LS1 w/79k that came with a tranny out of a Camaro for something like $3300, '05 LS2 30k miles no tranny for $4800... I don't think I have that much in my running project unless I count the truck. $3-400 might get you an early 90's engine of any breed around here and that is about it. Anything performance oriented or especially GM is painful.
If I was worried about 90-110mph racing I not only would have selected something other than a 3spd for a transmission, but a vehicle more adept at high speed. Something like a Mustang for example... I have only driven 100mph once, and that was in college seeing how my car at the time would do, it putted along there easier than my Ranger did 60mph mph with the old engine not counting the power difference. Plain and simple it was built for it. It caught no wind, the suspension was right there... just beautiful. I have no desire to do the same with my Ranger.
The '02 has 3.73's, it is punchy out of the hole but feels like it relies on its gearing and falls out once moving.
My Ranger also has 3.73's, The '94 and '85 have 235/75-15 tires, the '02 has 235/70-16's so they are all pretty close there. I know the Ex's are heavier than a Ranger, but I have never weighed them... or my Ranger for that matter after the swap. And like I said before, with only open headers my 5.0 has yet to venture out on the street yet so I may be skewed, also being used to a complete dog for 11 years in my truck may be messing up my butt dyno too.
'87 5.0 non-HO has 8.9:1 compression, a simple cam swap is the only difference between it and a 200hp '86 HO. If you time it right castoff HO cams can be had for free, I was crunched for time and didn't. 1.7 ratio rocker arms are good for another 15hp.
According to my books a OHC 4.0 is rated 10 hp over my 5.0 stock at a higher RPM, the 4.0 is rated lower torque also at a higher RPM. I don't have my books here with me at work for exact #'s though.
I have been watching craigslist for LS's after these debates, I have found one '02 LS1 w/79k that came with a tranny out of a Camaro for something like $3300, '05 LS2 30k miles no tranny for $4800... I don't think I have that much in my running project unless I count the truck. $3-400 might get you an early 90's engine of any breed around here and that is about it. Anything performance oriented or especially GM is painful.
If I was worried about 90-110mph racing I not only would have selected something other than a 3spd for a transmission, but a vehicle more adept at high speed. Something like a Mustang for example... I have only driven 100mph once, and that was in college seeing how my car at the time would do, it putted along there easier than my Ranger did 60mph mph with the old engine not counting the power difference. Plain and simple it was built for it. It caught no wind, the suspension was right there... just beautiful. I have no desire to do the same with my Ranger.
Last edited:
