Ford Ranger Forum - Forums for Ford Ranger enthusiasts!

Go Back   Ford Ranger Forum - Forums for Ford Ranger enthusiasts! > >
Forgot Password? Join Us!

Welcome to Ford Ranger Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread

  #1  
Old 06-06-2013, 10:28 PM
Ipsofractum Ipsofractum is offline
It's metric.. no wait..
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 9
Default Crazy talk

So I was wasting time online, and I was looking at dyno sheets for various motors in stock trim,
and an idea came to me. I have searched frf, and google searched with little success. I put it to you. Thoughts:

Vehicle: 1990 Toyota 4-runner 4door (donor) gvw: 3760lb
Engine: 2958 cc 3VZ-E 3.0L SOHV 150 hp (112 kW) at 4800 rpm with 180 lbft (244 Nm) of torque at 3400 rpm.
Other spec: Bore at 87.5 mm (3.4 in) stroke is 82.0 mm (3.2 in).
Part of the VZ series of engines offered by Toyota:
1VZ-FE (2.0 L (1992 cc) version. Bore is 78 mm (3.07 in) and stroke is 69.5 mm (2.7 in). Output is 136 hp
(101 kW) at 6000 rpm and 128 lbft (173 Nm) at 4600 rpm.)
2VZ-FE (2.5 L (2507 cc) version. Bore is 87.5 mm (3.4 in) and stroke is 69.5 mm (2.7 in) and the compression ratio is 9.0. Output is 119 kW (159 bhp) at 5800 rpm and 216 Nm (159 lbft) at 4600 rpm with red line limit of 6800 rpm.
3VZ-E (spec above)
3VZ-FE 3.2 L 185 hp (138 kW) at 5800 rpm and 189 lbft (256 Nm) at 4600 rpm. Compression ratio is 9.6:1.
4VZ-FE 2.5 L (2496 cc) version. Bore is 87.5 mm (3.4 in) and stroke is ever so slightly lower from the 2VZ-FE at 69.2 mm (2.7 in). Output is 173 hp (129 kW) at 6000 rpm.
5VZ-FE 3.4 L (3378 cc) engine which replaced the 3VZ-E. Bore is up to 93.5 mm (3.7 in) and stroke is 82.0 mm (3.2 in) while the compression ratio stays the same as the 3VZ-FE at 9.6:1. Output is 190 hp (142 kW) at 4800 rpm with 220 lbft (298 Nm) of torque at 3600 rpm.

This is the question, the 4.0 L Cologne V6 in my 1997 Mazda is nearing 300k on it and after reading about what the various problems that are with the valve train in that motor, It's made me think that perhaps sooner then later, its going to need a fresh one. Rather then opt to replace the motor (even with a newer V6 from a later model Ranger) Why not opt for some un-charted territory.

I have *some* sense when it comes to the complexity of engine swaps. I work in a machine shop as a 2nd year millwright apprentice specializing in 220v Electrical circuitry, just recently whom I apprentice under and I completed an overhaul of a 1939 patriot 18' lathe, bringing it up to current CNC standards (complete with modern electronics, readers and electrical layout, DRO's etc, wiring, motors, instrumentation etc) All in all it was 1600hrs, and we tore it all down, blasted it, re-and-re'd everything, painted, set up and ran it.

I want to pry the 4.0 L v6 and trans out of the Mazda, and stuff in its place a 3VZ-E Toyota w/ trans simply because I think it has NEVER been done before. And I believe that I can get even BETTER economy out of it, but still have enough umph to spin the tires. (maybe it has, but come-fwd whomever...you are who I want to talk to)

The 3VZ-E would get bored out to the 5VZ-FE spec (93.5 mm bore x 82.0 mm stroke) with the heads and intake plenum polished, ceramic hedders, forged internals, and performance goodies to squeeze more power out of it. I want to see at LEAST 210hp, 230lb ft while keeping respectable fuel economy and drivability. I'm looking for efficiency & power. Essentially dropping .6 of a liter, but gaining 70hp and some torque in the process.

Straight accross apples to apples Comparison:

GVW: Ford Ranger: 3,149 lbs 4runner: 3,760 lbs

Engines Hp/tq (as advertized)

Ford: 160 hp (119 kW) and 225 lbft (305 Nm).
Economy (per addV) 15 City, 17 comb, 21 hwy

Toyota: 150 hp (112 kW) at 4800 rpm with 180 lbft (244 Nm) of torque
Economy (per addV) 14 City, 17 avg, 18hwy

Gearing: Trans/ratio split/Diff
Ford: M50D-R1HD 3.40 / 2.05 / 1.31 / 1.00 / 0.79 // 3:55 F 8' LS
Toyota: W56-C 3.95 / 2.14 / 1.38 / 1.00 / 0.85 // 4.10 F 8' LS (change to a 3:55 after swap)
W59 3.95 / 2.14 / 1.38 / 1.00 / 0.81 // 4:10 F 8' LS

The bitch I have about the M50D-R1HD transmission is that 1st gear is.. kind of useless. 2nd's too tall with the oversize tires and 1st feels too short. Looking at the Toy's trans, I can see that the 1st gear is more practical and the ratio change is flatter.

The other things that I am curious about. My Mazda is 2wd, this W56 would have a married t-case. So does anyone know where I can get a tail-shaft, where to look. I know Toyota made a few 2wd 4-runners, but I'm not sure if the transmissions are the same. Would I need to get one machined, because that is not a problem.

Don't worry about the electronics, it can all be changed over/modified to suit.

Anyways, I know it's a wierd idea. But..its weird enough to generate some interesting theories. What do you think guru's?
__________________
_______________________________________________
'97 Mazda B-Series.
*mods* Tilt, seats & 235/70R15's
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-06-2013, 11:29 PM
doyouquaxu doyouquaxu is offline
Almost ******
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,480
Default

TheToyota3.0 is a bigger joke and disappointment than Ford putting the 3.0 in a ranger. If you're going through the work, do a 3.4 or anything besides a 3.0
__________________
Why does everyone think prerunners just jump stuff?


Please click HERE to watch this video!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-06-2013, 11:31 PM
96_4x4_XLT 96_4x4_XLT is offline
Ford Ranger Driver
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 6,189
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doyouquaxu View Post
TheToyota3.0 is a bigger joke and disappointment than Ford putting the 3.0 in a ranger. If you're going through the work, do a 3.4 or anything besides a 3.0
This ^^^

sent from my iPhone 5....PSH!!! I don't have money for a iPhone 5
__________________
95 Ranger XLT 4x2 2.3 I4 5 speed 206,000 *dead*
96 Ranger XLT 4x4 4.0 V6 5 speed 173,000 *alive*
D35 front, 8.8 rear, 3.73 gears, limited slip rear diff
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-07-2013, 12:05 AM
AmericanPride! AmericanPride! is offline
Ford Ranger Driver
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 6,711
Default Re: Crazy talk

Wouldn't a newer 4.0 SOHC be damn near the same specs? Especially built like above?

Toyota has always been notorious for shitty mpg. I think you'd be wasting a ton of time and money
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sometimes I'm girl crazy.. right now I'm grille crazy. uh0h50 General Ford Ranger Discussion 22 01-27-2013 11:40 PM
Cb Talk Rango88 General Ford Ranger Discussion 4 04-20-2011 03:38 PM
Craigslist / eBay Find: Talk about someone who cant spell! HoustonM Trucks 12 12-17-2010 06:23 PM
Craigslist / eBay Find: Talk about a steal! Ranger01 Trucks 12 11-19-2010 12:51 PM
Talk to me :) peeplesjamiel Introduce Yourself 10 03-17-2010 02:01 AM