Night from hell with my B2!!

[jkufen]

The Motorcraft plugs are the best ones you can buy for this engine. Don't go screwing around with fancy multi-prong or anything like that.

I just bought a set of MCs for my truck, $14.50 for the set. Those are all I have used for years, and I have never had an issue from them.

Yeah I just looked up the plugs on advanceauto.com and with my 20% off coupon I can get them for $11 probably the cheapest repair I have yet to come across on my B2 so far!

 

[wildbill23c]

You should figure out why they melted themselves down. Age alone will not cause that to happen 90% of the time. The most common cause is the engine running too rich or some other source of incomplete combustion allowing raw fuel down the exhaust.

The glowing that you see is the catalyst matrix super-heating because fuel is burning inside the shell.


My advice for the moment, remove the shell and punch out the damage/melted stuff, put it back in and run it while you find your root cause, then replace the empty shell with a direct fit unit.


If you understand the purpose of the converters, how they do not hamper performance and reliability when everything else is operating properly (Bill, get out of the 70's and learn how things work these days or stop making asinine and uninformed comments about how the systems work when things aren't broken), you would not have that same attitude about running with no cats full time.

Wow some people just cant stand the fact that not everyone likes the new pile of shit vehicles around. Do a ton of research on vehicles before SMOG systems and see for yourself that all that crap reduced HP and economy. Sorry buddy but just because you think you know everything about everything doesn't mean you know about a vehicle's power differences by changing exhaust systems and designs, my previous work truck was a 1971 Ford F100, never had an issue with the truck and sadly it got better fuel economy than the 84 Ranger with all the SMOG crap on it and a smaller engine.

I'm working slowly on the process of getting my B2 put back together correctly so I can get some actual number of fuel economy before the exhaust system is fixed and after. I'm betting I'm going to lose some fuel economy once the exhaust system is fixed correctly.

 

[adsm08]

First, the RBV 2.8L is a horrible example. I agree that BEFORE EFI the emissions controls hurt performance and power. The carb engines were not designed to have this stuff in place, they were not tuned for it, and as with any first attempt at something, the systems themselves sucked.

On any engine introduced from about 1986 onward the engines and the controls, and all that are designed to work together as a system.


If you want to whine and cry about emissions controls and you don't want to have them, go buy something pre-1975. In the mean time, since I breath this air too, and I have respiratory issues, stop telling people it is ok to remove the devices that clean up the tail pipe emissions of their vehicles.

 

[Tedybear]

First, the RBV 2.8L is a horrible example. I agree that BEFORE EFI the emissions controls hurt performance and power. The carb engines were not designed to have this stuff in place, they were not tuned for it, and as with any first attempt at something, the systems themselves sucked.

On any engine introduced from about 1986 onward the engines and the controls, and all that are designed to work together as a system.


If you want to whine and cry about emissions controls and you don't want to have them, go buy something pre-1975. In the mean time, since I breath this air too, and I have respiratory issues, stop telling people it is ok to remove the devices that clean up the tail pipe emissions of their vehicles.

It's a valid point. With the systems going from carb's to EFI? The system runs extremely "Tight" and right. One has to look at the tail pipe emission outputs year to year, and when things switched over to fuel injection? That precise control over the air/fuel mixture did wonders for dropping harmful levels of some pretty nasty stuff.

Now for me it's two fold. I do not believe in "man made global warming" crap.(nor is this the time/place for a debate on it) But I'm smart enough to know what SMOG is...and it's pretty nasty stuff to breath in.

I do have to disagree slightly on one point. Age and a converter? Over time they can and do slowly wear out. But the better the car/truck is maintained? And that system is kept running as close to 100% as possible? They do last a heck of a long time--in most cases the life of the car/truck.

S-

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Wow some people just cant stand the fact that not everyone likes the new pile of shit vehicles around. Do a ton of research on vehicles before SMOG systems and see for yourself that all that crap reduced HP and economy. Sorry buddy but just because you think you know everything about everything doesn't mean you know about a vehicle's power differences by changing exhaust systems and designs, my previous work truck was a 1971 Ford F100, never had an issue with the truck and sadly it got better fuel economy than the 84 Ranger with all the SMOG crap on it and a smaller engine.

Meanwhile my brother's '11 Mustang GT puts out over 400hp and gets close to 30mpg...

About 3x the milage my dad's 325hp SS396 Chevelle got on a good day.

The '80's were dark days, they were still trying to figure out how to get power and emissions out of the same unit. IMO it was pretty bleak all the way around until about the mid 90's. Going to EFI helped but there were still a bunch of low powered gas sucking pigs around until about 10 years after that.

Emission controls on a 2.8 were set up very very stupid. I love carbs and EFI... just don't mix them. They ended up with a setup that had all the pitfalls of both setups (all the potential carb and electrical problems) but with none of the advantages.

Any V6 RBV IMO has struggled with fuel economy, that is why I got my '02 F-150 for a dd. Bigger horse, more weight, bigger engine (5.4) more capacity... similar milage.

 

[jkufen]

Any V6 RBV IMO has struggled with fuel economy, that is why I got my '02 F-150 for a dd. Bigger horse, more weight, bigger engine (5.4) more capacity... similar milage.

I don't know my 86 2.9 averages about 22-24 mpg with my 31" Maxxis Bighorns and as yall can see by the thread it is far from tuned well. Compared to my 06 Silverado with the 4.8 (averages 15-17 mpg) this is pretty good.

But I must agree with the rest of your post

 

[Ultraspontane]

If you want to whine and cry about emissions controls and you don't want to have them, go buy something pre-1975. In the mean time, since I breath this air too, and I have respiratory issues, stop telling people it is ok to remove the devices that clean up the tail pipe emissions of their vehicles.

Thank you!

 

[wildbill23c]

Did I say remove the emissions device IE (Catalytic Converter) hell if someone does that's on them. I already own a 1971 Ford F100 that's currently having a transmission rebuilt, then I'll be driving it once again so I can start tearing down the bronco 2 as a project.

A properly tuned engine will take care of more exhaust emissions than all the smog junk anyhow which if its not properly tuned will cause smog component problems i.e. catalytic converter failures. I really wish there was a proper way to compare 2 vehicles side by side for power differences between an emissions controlled model and a non-emissions controlled model I bet there's a difference still.

Anyhow back to the actual OP, the catalytic converter when it gets plugged up will drastically heat up as the exhaust gasses aren't able to pass through as easily, yes eventually at some point it will start glowing red, and the engine will start having operating problems. My 1984 Ford Ranger's converter failed due to a carburetor tuning issue it had and when the converter failed it caused such a back pressure on the engine that you couldn't get the truck to go any faster than about 40mph no matter how hard you pressed the skinny pedal. After the converter was replaced it ran just fine up until the ford garage messed with the carburetor again. After that I did the adjusting myself and never had another problem with it. A friends' jeep had the same problem except the catalytic converter would get so hot that it would make the floorboards of the jeep hot as well.

 

[jkufen]

Well after i cut the cats off it ran good for a bit then it went back to spitting and sputtering. We took it into the shop to change the plugs and everything went good till we broke #5 off in the head . After several hours of beating and pulling it still wont budge. I think the bad plug melted to the head. I gueas to get the plug out i am going to have to remove the head and take it out that way. This past week has been hell with the B2. Hopefully tomorrow will bring success!

 

[rusty7983]

That plug probably ain't been out in a while. My brother had one like it in a 94(?) 3.0 ranger. It took us hours to get out. pb blaster? Anytime aluminum and steel get together they bond real well. Had they been changed lately it would be a different story. That old ranger was the same way. He got it from me and I got it from my dad. So you know.
Autoiltes are the same as motorcraft. I believe they are made in the same place.

 

[jkufen]

yeah we finally got the plug out today. Had to go get easy-out. Now to put the last two plugs in and then the exhaust and the B2 will be ready to ride again hopefully

 

[Shran]

I don't know my 86 2.9 averages about 22-24 mpg with my 31" Maxxis Bighorns and as yall can see by the thread it is far from tuned well. Compared to my 06 Silverado with the 4.8 (averages 15-17 mpg) this is pretty good.

But I must agree with the rest of your post

I'd agree with this, before I did all the biggering on my '86, it would easily pull 25mpg in town. I think the early 2.9s, even with the head issues, are easily the most fuel efficient RBV engine out there...certainly when you factor in HP, torque, and displacement too.

Anyway, whatever the cause of your issue, just put a universal cat back on it...they're like $40 from Summit.

 

[jkufen]

Yeah I am running the B2 now with only a 2-3 ft exhaust pipe and when I hit about 3 rpms it starts to studder and shake. I believe it might be a back pressure issue right now because I just changed all the plugs. Im going to do the exhaust tomorrow and see if that fixes my issue. I am running a single in single out thrush muffler with the 2.5 inch inlet and outlet. I am running 2.5 inch pipe because i have it already laying around from a prior exhaust job. I am going to run the exhaust straight back and then 45 it out in front of the passenger tire. I have heard this may cause a loss in torque but I am going to try it before I go out and buy more exhaust pipe.

 

[Twister]

I'd agree with this, before I did all the biggering on my '86, it would easily pull 25mpg in town. I think the early 2.9s, even with the head issues, are easily the most fuel efficient RBV engine out there...certainly when you factor in HP, torque, and displacement too.

Anyway, whatever the cause of your issue, just put a universal cat back on it...they're like $40 from Summit.

There must be something horribly wrong with my truck as I only get 14 city. Anyway hope you can figure out what's wrong with your truck, I battled my 85 for 6 months before I gave up and started a 302 swap.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Shran]

Yeah I am running the B2 now with only a 2-3 ft exhaust pipe and when I hit about 3 rpms it starts to studder and shake. I believe it might be a back pressure issue right now because I just changed all the plugs. Im going to do the exhaust tomorrow and see if that fixes my issue. I am running a single in single out thrush muffler with the 2.5 inch inlet and outlet. I am running 2.5 inch pipe because i have it already laying around from a prior exhaust job. I am going to run the exhaust straight back and then 45 it out in front of the passenger tire. I have heard this may cause a loss in torque but I am going to try it before I go out and buy more exhaust pipe.

It's not a back pressure issue... I've run a 2.9 with nothing at all past the manifolds and it was fine. The back pressure thing is kind of a myth anyway.

There must be something horribly wrong with my truck as I only get 14 city.

Clearly. Lots of variables there, time to do some troubleshooting.