Found this 87 2wd Ranger with it's awesome 2.9 on YouTube

[Bird76Mojo]

Don't worry boys. There's a silver lining here. With my 2.9 hatred, I'm driving market prices down on them, on every single website that mentions them. So in the end they're cheaper for you dick tucking 2.9 fangirls.

 

[8thTon]

Hey this threads been going for a day now - there's a decent chance that 2.9 has blown up in the mean time!

 

[rusty ol ranger]

Don't worry boys. There's a silver lining here. With my 2.9 hatred, I'm driving market prices down on them, on every single website that mentions them. So in the end they're cheaper for you dick tucking 2.9 fangirls.

Why?

So you can feel better about your 4.0 compensator?

 

[rusty ol ranger]

Hey this threads been going for a day now - there's a decent chance that 2.9 has blown up in the mean time!

My 2.9 has been in service for 32 years and hasnt exploded.

Soooooo....i doubt that one is going away anytime soon.

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

My 2.9 has been in service for 32 years and hasnt exploded.

Soooooo....i doubt that one is going away anytime soon.

32 years in two weeks. And yup. Still going.

 

[Bird76Mojo]

Neither one of those 2.9's have been in CONTINUOUS SERVICE for that many years. Huge difference.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

Neither one of those 2.9's have been in CONTINUOUS SERVICE for that many years. Huge difference.

Either way...

The 2.9 is no where near as bad as some make them out to be. Yes youve had bad luck but lets be real here....thats not exactly the norm.

Every engine ever installed in a ranger has issues...but for some reason the 2.9 seems to get hammered harder then the rest for it.

 

[Bird76Mojo]

Either way...

The 2.9 is no where near as bad as some make them out to be. Yes youve had bad luck but lets be real here....thats not exactly the norm.

Every engine ever installed in a ranger has issues...but for some reason the 2.9 seems to get hammered harder then the rest for it.

A member just posted here (or possibly on another Ranger forum, but I think here) a couple days ago about his 2.9 starting to burn coolant.. I see several of those posts every year. It's absolutely the norm, though it has slowed down because there simply aren't very many of them left on the road anymore. I've seen a LOT of Rangers with the same problem over the years. Seen a lot of them for sale because of it. Seen a lot of them scrapped because of it.

I've said it before but it bears repeating. When an aftermarket company goes through the considerable effort and cost to design and cast a redesigned cylinder head for an engine, and it's not a performance head but meant to be a direct replacement, just to fix the flaws in the original, there's a nation-wide problem with that engine/head design. R/D isn't exactly cheap to do such a thing and they have to be sure there's enough of a problem to see a return on that investment.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

A member just posted here (or possibly on another Ranger forum, but I think here) a couple days ago about his 2.9 starting to burn coolant.. I see several of those posts every year. It's absolutely the norm, though it has slowed down because there simply aren't very many of them left on the road anymore. I've seen a LOT of Rangers with the same problem over the years. Seen a lot of them for sale because of it. Seen a lot of them scrapped because of it.

I've said it before but it bears repeating. When an aftermarket company goes through the considerable effort and cost to design and cast a redesigned cylinder head for an engine, and it's not a performance head but meant to be a direct replacement, just to fix the flaws in the original, there's a nation-wide problem with that engine/head design. R/D isn't exactly cheap to do such a thing and they have to be sure there's enough of a problem to see a return on that investment.

You also have no idea how those 2.9s were maintained or beat on either.

Give me any engine (besides maybe a 300) and i bet i can destroy it too. The 2.9 is sensitive, ill give it that, but if you choose to keep driving 30 mi after you blow a hose then thats not exactly the engines fault.

 

[Bird76Mojo]

The 2.9 is sensitive, ill give it that, but if you choose to keep driving 30 mi after you blow a hose then thats not exactly the engines fault.

None of the posts I've seen in the last couple years had anything to do with a blown hose. Some were due to a failed thermostat, but if an engine is so "sensitive" that it can't handle one overheating event without cracking the heads, then those heads are made of glass and were designed wrong.

NONE of my cracked heads on the 2.9 were due to a blown hose, yet I still cracked several heads. Some cracked for no apparent reason. Without ever being overheated. Even with a brand new radiator, water pump, and thermostat being installed. As well as new head gaskets and head bolts. On two different blocks, if the same thing keeps happening, even after buying a completely new cooling system, you got yourself a LEMON of an engine..

The 2.9 is more than sensitive. It's a major design flaw on Ford's part. In more than one way. There's a reason they ditched it..

 

[Saddle Tramp]

If you think that engine was bad, you should check out the Chrysler 2.2 turbo 2 engines. Every mechanic at the dealership swore at them.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

None of the posts I've seen in the last couple years had anything to do with a blown hose. Some were due to a failed thermostat, but if an engine is so "sensitive" that it can't handle one overheating event without cracking the heads, then those heads are made of glass and were designed wrong.

NONE of my cracked heads on the 2.9 were due to a blown hose, yet I still cracked several heads. Some cracked for no apparent reason. Without ever being overheated. Even with a brand new radiator, water pump, and thermostat being installed. As well as new head gaskets and head bolts. On two different blocks, if the same thing keeps happening, even after buying a completely new cooling system, you got yourself a LEMON of an engine..

The 2.9 is more than sensitive. It's a major design flaw on Ford's part. In more than one way. There's a reason they ditched it..

They ditched it cause the 3.0 was cheaper because it was in both the taurus and ranger.

Opinions are opinions man. But all im saying is you seem to be the only one saying what youre saying. Yes, the 2.9 cracks heads, just like 3.0s blow bottom ends, the lima blows timing belts, and the 4.0 has issues as well. Nothings perfect. But the 2.9 seems to get more then its fair share of hate. For what reason i dont know. Every one ive had has been pretty solid.

 

[Bird76Mojo]

They ditched it cause the 3.0 was cheaper because it was in both the taurus and ranger.

Do you have the direct documentation from the bean counters at Ford that prove that statement, or is it purely opinion?

 

[rusty ol ranger]

Do you have the direct documentation from the bean counters at Ford that prove that statement, or is it purely opinion?

Do you have documentation it wasnt axed for that reason?

 

[Bird76Mojo]

Do you have documentation it wasnt axed for that reason?

...aaaaand exactly how I knew you'd answer.

The only thing I have on my side, which you don't, is that when a manufacturer comes up with a product that is a hit in sales, or works and lasts far better than they expected, they continue using it for a loooong time. The 302 design being a perfect example of that.

The 2.9 cylinder head design certainly wasn't continued... In fact, it was redesigned once, and then DISCONTINUED.