upgrades done now idea time

[whitecap]

ok, I have a 1991 ford ranger, 2.9l 5 speed,
I just installed a new set of world product heads, have gotten rid of my open diff for a 3.73 traction lock out of a 1992 ford ranger.
however I dont like the fuel injection system, and I dont want to modify it either. what I want to do is find out if there is a company that makes
a carburated manifold for this engine or if a 2.8l manifold will work.
can anybody help me with this...
thanks..

 

[AKBroncoII]

Why would you want to get rid of the fuel injection? No one makes a carb manifold for them. Why anyone would bother is beyond me.

 

[whitecap]

well I have always been a big fan of carb cam, hi comp good exhaust motors,
fuel injection is good, but it has it limitations..
its ok, I will find a way to get a high rise, dual plane manifold on there,
then the cam... my style of engine..

 

[AKBroncoII]

Cool, I suppose if you want to fab up that much work. The only limitation to the fuel injection is your lack of knowledge. Good luck though.

 

[whitecap]

Hey you, dont insult me, you dont know me, or what I know or dont.
yeah, i could change my injectors, throttle body, fpr, maf mod, recurve chip for my ecm, I am no idiot, I am a CHIEF ENGINEER FOR CROWLEY MARINE SERVICES, if you dont know what that means, go the the stcw.mill website and see what it take to get that license, I spent 15 years in the military as a
heavy equipment mechanic, and hold a master cert from catapillar..
I was just asking if anybody has done this! no the fab work is not that hard,
its just what I like.. carbs, cams, notice all the race cars today, just like when I was a kid, carbs cams hi comp good exhaust, ever watch pinks?
how many winners are running fuel injection? like none..
dont insult me...
whitecap

 

[Hewgull]

I think the majority of people run carbs is because of the cost. A carb has it's limitations too. There was a big block injected truck that won on pinks.

 

[puty72]

i think you guys need to give this guys some respect for what he likes and wants to do. If u dont like carb engines that keep it to yourself. I myself was wondering if there was a carb manifold for a 2.9 but never found one. I thought these forums were made to help others out not to criticize others ideas.

 

[CraigK]

whitecap

Why did you replace the heads on your 91 engine? I thought 2.9L engines from 89's on had corrected the head casting issue. Did you have a problem? Thanks.
CraigK

 

[Psychopete]

I thought 2.9L engines from 89's on had corrected the head casting issue.

Not really. The newer heads were somewhat better, but still had the cracking issue. And never expect an 89+ to have the upgraded heads by year, there are things to look for. World Prod heads are even better.

The OP is right though, you can get a better running motor (performance wise) for cheaper trying to adapt a carb as opposed to going with a MAF computer and trying to tweak it. Or even more headache - an aftermarket engine management system. I'd never consider the SD/MAP computer with anything performance.

Look in the tech article forum on this site, there is a guy who adapted a duraspark box on the engine. There is a book on 4.0,2.9,2.8,2.6 OHV V6 engines that states that a 2.8L dizzy can be made to work in the 2.9L with the appropriate gear from the dealership (didn't give part #s though). I have no clue on that, it's been brought up, but no one has tried it that I know of. I have no idea if the stock could be made to work, or if there would be some way to use the pick up (or modify it?) to be used with a duraspark box (or maybe even some sort of aftermarket ignition module?).

For putting on a carb, you'll simply need to make an adapter plate for one. I thought about this and came up with a 2 piece design at one time a long time ago. The hard part would be keeping the ports to the lower from the carb equal (like keeping the 2 middle cylinders from being richer than the 4 others). My brother has a mill, so it would have been feasible for me to do. There's no manufactured intake for the use of a carb on a 2.9L.

All in all, no one really tries to do what you're goal is, I would like to see it work myself. It's going to be an experiment for sure. I've modded mine with using the EFI system, it was pretty quick for what it was, but decided a V8 would suit me better.

Pete

 

[whitecap]

Heads,

well I have had this truck for 4 months now, it has 112kon it, paid 800.00 for it. had it smogged, after a tune up, was driving home and it started overheating.. the head let go next to the #6 cylinder. found this website and started doing research.. I ended up ordering a set of "89tm" heads from
Kragen auto parts for a 1991 ranger. paid 500.00 for the heads sounds like a good deal right? well when I got the heads, the box on it said action cylinder heads. opened the box and guess what I found, oval valve train pedastals with the 89tm stamp on the head.. well shit this wont work. I wont do the labor just to put more crap back on the engine.. so I ordered the world product heads, 300.00 more, but atleast the heads solid, and will handle the extra demands a modified engine will demand.. and I have been very pleased with them. can take a pick of them on my engine if you want to see..
which I plan to do.. will eventualy put a 351 windsor in my ford, I know the fit will be tight, but I like that engine, just like my 1977 280z with a 355, very common engine swap, well I want the ranger to be a not so very engine swap.
4.0's 5.0's common. built 351 not very.

as for the little 2.9l in my truck now, look at the way they are all modified, basically the same, how many have you seen with a 10.5.1 comp custom crower cam, and naturaly asperated? like none. plus with the right jets, and metering rods, the carbs is completely tunable. anyways thats me..

 

[IRKillroy]

uh, then you might just think about swapping the engine out with a 2.8l.... mainly 'cause the intake is apart of the heads... you noticed that right?

that's serious fab work that isn't worth it... the bottom end of a 2.9 isn't the toughest, but with a nice cage down there it'd stiffen things up some... the engine "could" rev up towards 9,000 rpm with the right work done to it... you should start looking into the 4 valve heads from the merkurs... the cosworth 2.9l engines in the UK.... do enough research and you'll end up finding some parts you might like for your engine.

and I understand 9,000 isn't what you are looking for (or is it?) but it's a testiment of what the engine can do.

as for fuel injected vs. carb.... tuning an injection system takes more money but you can customize it much more efficiently... you can balance the cylinder power by changing the spray pulse, etc... to each injector and or have a O2 sensor on each exhaust port to control the fuel map to each cylinder.... plus so much more.....

carbs though are nostolgic, and in a layman sense, simple both in design and function... I would prefer a carb'd engine on my toys to simplify tuning on the trail as well as diagnostics when stuff goes wrong.... plus more....

so each has it's strong points, let's not argue semantics and personal opinions here.

"Cool, I suppose if you want to fab up that much work. The only limitation to the fuel injection is your lack of knowledge. Good luck though."

I don't see the insult here... he just said the limitations to FI is your knowledge of it... that's true!!! if you know nothing of it or the technical aspect required to tune it then it is very limiting... my dad could be the best mechanic in his day, but if he can't surf the internet then FI sucks for him.

I think you should back up on your little ego trip of a post you had up there... and chill out.

 

[El_Capitan]

I'm ringing in here a little late, but Offenhauser made a 4-barrel mani for the 2.8 I've seen one in person they do exist. Wouldn't that work on a 2.9?? I doubt finding one or building it for that matter, would be that difficult. What I wonder about is a distributor..and wiring, cleaning up all that fun late 80's-early 90's wiring.. I suppose you could duraspark it though..

 

[Psychopete]

built 351 not very.

as for the little 2.9l in my truck now, look at the way they are all modified, basically the same, how many have you seen with a 10.5.1 comp custom crower cam, and naturaly asperated? like none. plus with the right jets, and metering rods, the carbs is completely tunable. anyways thats me..

I agree that would be freaking awesome (I am an advocate of this sort of stuff), but for practicality, you might spend the money spent on the 2.9L for like a good transmission for your 351W swap (if that's your goal) for instance. If your goal was to keep the 2.9L period, I would say go for it!

5 years after I messed w/ my engine, I am doing a 5.0L swap now. I really wished I did the 5.0L swap from the get go. I don't care how common it is, I know I will have fun and that's all that matters. You'll have a lot of money into it (2.9L), only to rip it out and put something else in (you won't be able to sell many of those 2.9L parts, except maybe the good heads, the dizzy, and method of which you put a carb on). But not near what you paid for them unfortunately.

Pete

 

[Hewgull]

It think it seems pretty feasible that you could use the lower manifold from the 2.9 and the remove the upper plenum and make an adapter to mount a carb.