Eaton 3800 supercharger of any use to us in the ranger world?

[Snoranger]

What about @bobbywalter ’s suggestion of a 2.3 Ecoboost in something?

I wouldn’t rule out a 2.7 Ecoboost. The 3.5L gets most of the attention, but the 2.7L is not far behind in power.

 

[SenorNoob]

Ecoboost 2.3 was on my list of possibilities when I replaced the 4.0 this time around. That $8000 all in swap cost scared me off...

 

[bobbywalter]

i am working towards these capacities. ridiculously busy


at this point in engine cost, the f150 5.0 is down and the n/a cyclone is up....they are about the same cost. 2700-3500 bux 90-120k miles


the nano 2.7 is about maxed out, the 3.5 is about 40 percent....so there is a HUGE DIFFERENCE between the 2.7 nanos and the 3.5 cyclones if a guy was going for a power build..

i would point out that a power build going conventional boost on a n/a cyclone engine would be the way to go.

but a stock ecoboost is friggin stout and daily drivable to a point of bliss.


i like the n/a cyclones....with a good tune you can get 280 tq and 300 hp out of them and that seems decent in a old ranger---about what a good tuned 5.0 windsor can do.


the nano 2.7 is certainly the best deal as far as power and economy i would wager...

3000 for this one over at premier in westland 102k miles.


the gen 3 ls engines are aged out....the gen 5 ls and lt are junk....i would rather stick forks in electrical outlets that work on hemis....they are kewl....but i have put superchargers and pipes and suspension stuff on them....total suck and misery.

so.

the 2.3 ecoboost and 5.0 coyote gen 3 seem to be the best engines out there from what i have seen. but the gen 4 coyote is totally turned into an unreliable pos with the belt drive bullshit.


supercharged or turbo ohv 4.0 is definitely going to be stout.

a turbo 300 i6 or votec 4200 would be kewlz though if you want 6 holers.