How is the 2.9L?

[KC200787]

Well, I am sure it has been coverd and what little searching I have done has turned up some promissing information about the 2.9L.

I know that how a car/truck is driven and what conditions how it was taken care of etc etc... determines how long a 2.9L will last, but how reliable is the 2.9L? So far, the most noticable "bad" thing I have seen about it is the heads have a tendency to crack if you get it hot. Now I know absolutly nothing about these engines, so it's diffcult for me to swtich from my reliable 302s.

One big question about the 2.9L is what kind of fuel mileage can I expect from a very very very light foot (as I have to be on my fullsize bronco). So far I have seen reports of 15-21 mpg which at any rate is better than what I get now. Right now I do about 70/75% highway and 30/35% everything inbettween and I need something better on gas.

What I am currently looking for and at:
1986 Supercab Ranger. 147K 5sp. v6 (2.9L) Manual locking hubs. Manual shift xfercase. $800
OR
93 Reg cab ranger 110K 5sp electric engaging xfercase. manual hubs, v6...I think it is a 3.0...can't remember. 2100

Of course I would like to go for the 93 but I am slowly begining to like the 86 more and more. IDK for sure, but the 86s clutch is good from what I drove, and it seems to right pretty good. 3-4 issues that I could deal with, but I am unsure (the 86 has a fuel gauge problem, water leaking from the windshield or visor installed and the seat is broke.) Naturally either would get a tune up pretty soon.



I guess what I am wondering is how plentiful is parts (new for mechanical parts and electrics) for the mid 80s trucks and how difficult are they to work on? What fuel milage is average for highway at about 60-65 mph? How good are the clutches?

I am not worried about the rangers off-roadability but I do use 4wd. From what I have read it will pull a decent amount so I am not worried about load and towing to much.

Whew. Sorry for making that so long, but I am just wondering if a ranger is really what I should buy as I have a few other options to drive (mainly an 87 Tbird). Hopefully I wont get flamed to much, but as for that I don't have a lot of time to research about all of the rangers as my time window for buying either could be gone quickly with rising fuel prices.

KC

 

[IMenriched]

You've touched on this abit already....the 86' is going to be more difficult to find parts for, just in terms that it is older, (personally I haven't had trouble getting parts, yet), & upgrades are limited. not that they can't be found, they can. what you may also concider is the frame under each unit....is one ruster than the other...shows sings of damage/repairs. If the base/frame is good...then it is personal choice.

Just look around here on TRS...You'll see some really like the 2.9 and others like the 3.0.
there is GREAT info for either unit.
Manual shift is going to be your best bet for getting the most MPG's and dedicated maintence with either...with the newer electronics in the 93 one would think that you
shouldn't have as much of the maintence time as the older 86'. gearing seems to be the key critical link as far as getting best economy out of these things...410 tends to get better than most.

A side note; a few have swapped out the gaser and transplanted a diesels...mostly cummins, the 86 had the option of a diesel from the factory, few and far between are those.

it boils down to your personal comfort/ choice, of how much you are willing to spend and do for yourself.

 

[Hahnsb2]

Milage varys a lot, when my B2 had 3.45 gears and 235s I averaged 17-18MPG normal driving and I got nearly 23MPG on a road trip to the coast once. Now with 4.10s and 31s I average 15-17 MPG normal driving, haven't done enough freeway to get my freeway milage. You should expect 18ish with one of those rigs.

 

[KC200787]

Thanks for the replies guys.

So, far I have just looked at the bodies and interiors and have seen what they need. I am actually worried about both of them because the 93 has had everything but the cab replaced with fenders, doors, and the bed with anothers. It has also had some other parts replaced due to rust. I didn't look at the frame of either as I am not completly serious about buying them. The 86 on the otherhand is also rusty, but again, I didn't look at the under side as I am not to serious to buy one.

Whichever or whatever I buy or do is going to be a dd and as I don't go off road, it doesn't have to be that capable. I just still find it hard to believe 18mpg highway is what the guy is getting, but it is stlill better than what I have now.

KC

 

[Hahnsb2]

Freeway should be over 20, these motors can be picky about the RPMs, generally I find around 2400-2600 RPMs best.

 

[grnrngr]

I was getting right at 20 mpg with my 86 B2, 30 miles each way to work and back, at 65-70mph, 2.9, 5spd, electric xfer shift, auto hubs, no A/C, 235/75x15s and prolly 100lbs of extra crap in the truck...I think it's a great motor, but like you already know, keep your eyes on the coolant...

 

[jcm]

I get 19-20 mpg in my 86 BII. I would say the engine is not the greatest thing that ford ever made. The 86 ranger I had and this BII, it has been an uphill battle keeping the engine happy. But they both have over 200,000 miles on them!

 

[KC200787]

So far, I assume that the only serious problem has been heads cracking then? Any other things to consider about an 88+ year ranger?

I would rather buy a 90s as I think they look better than the early style. I'm unsure though, but I would still consider an 80s ranger as well.

KC

 

[grnrngr]

It almost seems like the 93 is more used since it has almost the same mileage as the 86. I don't have any knowledge about the 3.0 but I've had real good luck with my 2.9s. FWIW, some folks like the 86/87 better because it has a larger throttle body, and slightly less emissions crap. If I'da had my s*** together and fixed my leaky heater core in my Ranger instead of dumping stop leak in it, I might not have had to replace the motor. Well, that and a freeze plug that popped, prolly cause I didn't have the right anti-freeze mix when it froze..overheated REALLY bad a couple times.......

 

[tanbuddy]

When i was going back to college (150 miles) i got 23 mpg wiht my ranger on the highway. I didnt run 31s then, just the stock tires. It didnt have much power up hills or in headwinds but other than that it was ok.
Around the back roads by my house i average 18 mpg wiht stock or the bigger tires