2.3L ('83-'97) Potential.

[bobbywalter]

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

youtube.com

Yeah.....gets me every time

 

[Roert42]

Looks like he lost control for a little bit too and still managed to stay out front.
Impressive.

 

[Lefty]

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

youtube.com

Yeah.....gets me every time

Actually this makes a lot of sense. A Chevy Camaro and/or a Ford Mustang weighs about 500 lbs more than a Ranger reg cab or a reg cab 2WD flare side.

 

[FiremanBob]

So how built is that engine? How many HP? How much boost?

 

[bobbywalter]

i dont know that truck personally....but i have a high degree of confidence that engine is a cantankerous animal based on past experience yet drivable....likely 500 wheel hp plus. there is a similar truck that i know the actual truck that makes 640 plus wheel hp but is on a fast system and still not street friendly....but drivable...

in any case... a 10 second 4 cylinder truck is very impressive to me... i am good with 13's.....on stockish suspension. 10s ....thats some serious work driving and keeping it in line...

 

[FiremanBob]

Wow! Not for me. When I do the eventual rebuild on my Duratec I'd like to get it up to around 200-225 hp, possibly even without turbo, while maintaining good driveability.

 

[Blmpkn]

Wow! Not for me. When I do the eventual rebuild on my Duratec I'd like to get it up to around 200-225 hp, possibly even without turbo, while maintaining good driveability.

It's a balance with a 4 cyl.. making good power and retaining drivabilty.. and it's a goal that's more easily attained/more realistic with some sort of forced induction. especially for a daily driver.

Without forced induction a 4 cyl needs a lot of RPMs to make good power. A lot of rpms generally need a lot of cam, and a cam that is "a lot" doesn't like putting around town at 2k rpm like a stock motor does... so you'd be losing drivability in a sense by having a motor that doesn't want to (cant) "cruise" through town below 4k.

With that many rpms come the need for much better (more expensive) parts than stock as well.. forged crank, rods, arp hardware throughout.. probably want portwork done.. would definitely want a quality balance.. it's a commitment on many levels.

 

[FiremanBob]

Thanks. I'd be happy to add a turbo to get what I need. We have had turbocharged Saabs for ten years now and I really like the fuel economy when you keep a light touch on the throttle.

My need for more power is more related to carrying loads and towing than for speed. I use the truck around the farm and would like to be able to tow more than the 1400 lbs that the manual says I can, for buying hay, moving compost, and such. Of course I'd add an extra-heavy duty clutch.

 

[Blmpkn]

Thanks. I'd be happy to add a turbo to get what I need. We have had turbocharged Saabs for ten years now and I really like the fuel economy when you keep a light touch on the throttle.

My need for more power is more related to carrying loads and towing than for speed. I use the truck around the farm and would like to be able to tow more than the 1400 lbs that the manual says I can, for buying hay, moving compost, and such. Of course I'd add an extra-heavy duty clutch.

There are certain legal worries about towing/hauling more than a vehicle is rated for.. that's all up to you whether or not you want to take those risks

The other risk in your case, is the manual trans. Manuals are weaker than automatics, that's why ford rates the manual rangers the way they do. It's not the clutch.. but the gears. Only 2 or 3 teeth are engaged at any time in a manual. You'd likely be fine as long as your mindful.. but its still a consideration.

 

[FiremanBob]

Ouch. I didn't know the gears were the weak point. I'd hate to sell this great truck.

 

[Lefty]

There are certain legal worries about towing/hauling more than a vehicle is rated for.. that's all up to you whether or not you want to take those risks

The other risk in your case, is the manual trans. Manuals are weaker than automatics, that's why ford rates the manual rangers the way they do. It's not the clutch.. but the gears. Only 2 or 3 teeth are engaged at any time in a manual. You'd likely be fine as long as your mindful.. but its still a consideration.

I never thought of it that way.

 

[scotts90ranger]

Torque is what hurts gears, my '90 has like 300k on the trans, I've been in it twice but mainly for synchros the first time and bearings the second, changed the 5/R slider once and that was the only gear related thing that showed abnormal wear...

 

[Blmpkn]

I'm sure ford has some 'built in' leeway with the tow ratings they set for their manuals.. for liability and self preservation (warranty) purposes.

A guy might not want to haul DOUBLE what it's rated for... but 50% over probably wouldn't be too rough on equipment... so long as your being mindful.