Kunz Korner 2.9 Tips

[holyford86]

hey holyford,

did you notice any increase in mileage with the MAF system? how much work was it?

no huge increase in mileage with it, but it made the truck much nicer to run below 1500 rpm, it will lug way lower than it ever did with the speed density setup. It did seem to free up a tiny bit of power (maybe) and there is no comparison in throttle response. I was planning on doing some performance upgrades at the time i installed it (cam, headers) and the MAF setup would have adapted to those changes much better than the speed density would have (MAF monitors actual airflow, it doesn't infer engine load from manifold vacuuum).

It was relatively easy for me to swap, I had the speed density wiring diagram and the MAF diagram when I did it. I pulled the wiring harness of a 4.0 apart at the junkyard and pulled the MAF wiring right back to the EEC, so it was solder two connections and plug in two more. You also have to jump one EEC pin to another (I forget which two) to get rid of a code 41 (lean).

 

[zukirider21]

hmmm i like the sound of this since i'll probably be running headers and maybe the bigger early tb sooner or later...

and i could definitely use some more luggability down low. by "no comparison in throttle response" do you mean it didnt change or it was way better/worse?

 

[holyford86]

hmmm i like the sound of this since i'll probably be running headers and maybe the bigger early tb sooner or later...

and i could definitely use some more luggability down low. by "no comparison in throttle response" do you mean it didnt change or it was way better/worse?

throttle response drastically improved, before the swap from an 850rpm idle, when you punch the throttle to the floor and let off, it would manage a sucking sound and the rpm would rise maybe 500 RPM. afterwards, with nothing else changed it would climb to 3500 RPM. in driving it would come off the line quicker as well, but the difference was marginal

 

[8879ford]

Wow, I am getting tired of people talking about what this engine cant do. 175hp is easily obtainable with a 2.9 if you know what you are doing, and you do it in the right places.

 

[adsm08]

The explorer rad was worth every penny when I did it. If your thermostat is working correctly you will see no difference whatsoever in the time it takes your engine to heat up. In -20 weather it took less than 5 minutes to start throwing heat and approximately 10 for the engine to be at 195*. 10 MPG? the truck in my sig gets 16-17MPG in combined driving in cold (under 32*) and 17-18 MPG otherwise, and I don't baby it, the engine is pretty tired as well.

I've seen guys on here say it works great. I've seen them here, and in other places, and in person, that end up dropping 5 to 7 MPG. Most of the successful ones I've seen were on trucks in the deep south.

This is one of the times where I say if it's working fine as is, don't screw with it.

 

[adsm08]

You also have to jump one EEC pin to another (I forget which two) to get rid of a code 41 (lean).

It's the two for the HEGO sensor. You have to jumper them together to enable the heater monitor or it thinks it's getting a lean reading. All the senors are heated, but only the MAF ones have a monitor for it.

Wow, I am getting tired of people talking about what this engine cant do. 175hp is easily obtainable with a 2.9 if you know what you are doing, and you do it in the right places.

A MAF conversion and a good aggressive cam are a good place to start.

I'm buying a built up 2.9 from my boss here soon. He's replacing it with a 5.0, but he put some nice high-perf heads and headers on it, and the most aggressive cam that the SD system can handle. It will be interesting to see what kind of power that thing has. Although today I got my tired old 200K+ beat up 2.9 to bury the needle and keep it there for a while.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

The Explorer rad is a drop in deal, nice to have as an option if you need it.

As long as the system stayed intact enough to keep the coolant in I never overheated my 2.8 though.

 

[Surrey]

This is one of the times where I say if it's working fine as is, don't screw with it.

I totally agree with this. Unless you have a problem with the truck running hot, I would leave it.

Wow, I am getting tired of people talking about what this engine cant do. 175hp is easily obtainable with a 2.9 if you know what you are doing, and you do it in the right places.

Boy Im glad you can be so specific as to what gives you more HP in what amounts and from what mods and stuff... You do one hell of a job defending that engine.

What would you do to get 175hp? New cam, modified rockers, exhaust, ported intake/heads/exhaust...?
Which mods are suitable for an old 300 000km+ engine?

 

[Psychopete]

I've done the MAF conversion with a street/drag cam profile, even to the point of almost super charging - and all I can say is that ya'll are barking up the wrong tree. I am sorry, but it is true. Tell me I am wrong all you want, I don't care, but trying to get power out of a 2.9L is a lose/lose situation. I was there 7 years ago, everyone told me what I am saying now, and they were right all along. It just took me having to do it to see that, it wasn't bad, it just wasn't worth it. But either way good luck with what ever you end up doing.

Edit:

He's replacing it with a 5.0, but he put some nice high-perf heads and headers on it, and the most aggressive cam that the SD system can handle.

Same old song and dance.