Ford Ranger Forum - Forums for Ford Ranger enthusiasts!

Ford Ranger Forum - Forums for Ford Ranger enthusiasts! (http://www.fordrangerforum.com/)
-   2.9 Liter Tech (http://www.fordrangerforum.com/2-9-liter-tech/)
-   -   1988 Ranger Project (http://www.fordrangerforum.com/2-9-liter-tech/1242-1988-ranger-project.html)

dranger 06-05-2009 07:38 AM

1988 Ranger Project
 
Ok I just bought a 1988 ford ranger that has a body in great condiyion(almost no rust) with a rebuilt transmission and 140 000 km on the engine. Its 2 wheel drive 2.9 litre V6. I got it for 700 dollars. Problem is its got a cracked one and possibly two cracked cyclinder heads. new heads will cost me 375 each so 750 total, but i know i can probably find an entire engine for that price. Does anyone have an engine they swapped out kicking around or heads? I'm also looking for two 1988 mirrors as someone both of mine. Anyone got '88 mirrors?

help would be greatly appreciated

dranger 06-07-2009 07:06 PM

ok so i went to burl's creek and picked up two mirrors new wheels cap centres and chrome lugs and a repair manual. i still need a an engine or heads that aren't cracked? anyone?

Psychopete 06-09-2009 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dranger (Post 4514)
ok so i went to burl's creek and picked up two mirrors new wheels cap centres and chrome lugs and a repair manual. i still need a an engine or heads that aren't cracked? anyone?

Have you tried a junk yard, like a rolled 2.9L BII or Ranger? Ford did have "upgraded" 2.9L heads on later models, but they are still prone to cracking. Some say 89+ have them, but this is not really the case. The rocker mounts are square and have a 10mm alternator bolt hole as opposed to the 8mm on the early heads. Really late 91-92 is a good chance for these, but then you also have to either take a crap shoot installing or bite the bullet and have a shop rework them and check for cracks. I believe World also sells just the bare heads that you'd need to reassemble for cheaper.

I paid $450 shipped for a set off of Ebay but the seller is no longer around. I recall them being much heavier than the stock heads. I would offer them to you, but there is a guy who has been waiting on me to remove them for at least 6 months. I just wanted to make sure my V8 swap went well before I finally parted my old motor out.

Honestly you could probably buy 2 whole replacement engines from the junk yard for $750 and have a hundred or so left over. See about a warantee and if they'll give you a new engine if the heads aren't good. They will usually let you hear it run, and be sure to let the engine fully warm. This is a very common problem with this engine. But also oiling issues in the valve train. FWIW, my '88 will never have a 2.9L again. I'll go 2.3L before I put another 2.9L back in, some won't die, but it seems a good majority are error prone.

The head cracking is usually from overheating (even slight) as well - the stock temperature gauge isn't at all accurate, be sure to flush the cooling system and make sure everything is in good working order before calling it done.

Pete

RangerJustin 06-09-2009 07:36 AM

V8 swap!

cdncowboy 06-10-2009 01:37 PM

lol everyone says v8 swap .. My 2.9 kills a stock 5L .. I have a few sets of heads .. I noticed you went ot burls creek .. where you from .. I have 4 running 2.9s and lots of parts .. CHEAP CHEAP need to get rid of some stuff ... I can easly get you a running motor with GOOD heads .. the newer up graded ones .. for under a couple hundred LMK

Psychopete 06-11-2009 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cdncowboy (Post 4686)
My 2.9 kills a stock 5L

What kind of mods are you running? I have a hard time believing that a 2.9L in any form besides on nitrous oxide or forced induction would beat even a low performance 5.0L. Maybe in a really heavy car like a Grand Marquis, but I'd have to see it to believe it. FWIW, I have thrown away thousands of dollars trying to get power of this motor.

Pete

RangerJustin 06-11-2009 10:33 AM

Find it very hard to believe as well. I am pretty sure my 4.0 could take down your 2.9 with ease and I couldn't take a 5.0

cdncowboy 09-23-2009 06:21 PM

a stock 5.o only runs 225 at the crank then it dropped to 215 .. if ya are ever in toronto canada I will be totally wiling to goto mosport and line up .. now if there is anything done .. no I can not touch it but stock I can the last time I dynoed I hit 228 at the rear

Downey 09-23-2009 06:29 PM

you got 228 rwhp from a 2.9? you a full of fucking shit. thats more than a stock 5.0 in an explorer makes. are you running any mods or anything. but there is no way you pulled 228 rwhp on a stock motor

smakes 09-23-2009 06:58 PM

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/l...downey-1-1.jpg

Clem 09-23-2009 07:30 PM

cdncowboy:
I agree, the 2.9 winds about 10% faster than most V8's and I have no problem believing they will take a stock 5.0.
Done that, both sticks and autos, the only one that gave a real good go at it was a 5.0 HO in a Lincoln.
It all depends on the driver and how good the 2.9 is. Some were real boat anchors, a 2.0 had more go that those.
A good 2.9 will wind to 6500 and stay there through 1st and 2nd, drop to 5500 in 3rd and 5000 in 4th. Most of the time the race is over by then.
What gears you running, 3.45 or 3.73, I had 3.45's and 205/15's in 86 B2. A couple friends had 2.9's that couldn't hold a candle to mine.

Ray

87rangerSummers 02-18-2010 10:13 PM

My buddy has a freshly rebuilt 2.9 in his bronco 2 and is completely stock. its a damn pooch. he raced a chevy 4.3 liter 1500 that was a piece of shit and got smoked no competition. are you sure it didnt say 22.8 rwhp on the dyno cuz thats just a lil more realistic. and thats coming from a guy who has a 2.0.

Clem 02-19-2010 07:42 AM

Like I said months ago, some are real boat anchors. The 86 and early 87's had a .020 shorter deck height and a larger throttle body bore. Some people at the time thought the ones that had more HP were actually European Cologne V6 that made it to the states. There have been many skeptics of the amount of HP that came from stock 2.9's, rightfully so. The one I had was a real screamer, those of friends were boat anchors in comparison. In the late 80' and early 90's there was a fellow on TRS named Kunz, he was taking automotive classes some where and had a 86? 2.9 that he touted as having near 250 HP. He told stories about some of his adventures with the 2.9 and his truck, was pretty impressive. Follow the link and read the article, at the bottom of the page is a link to Kunz Korner.
http://www.therangerstation.com/tech.../2_9_Page.html

Ray

Psychopete 02-19-2010 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clem (Post 74599)
2.9 that he touted as having near 250 HP.

Not trying to argue, as I don't know exactly all that he did to get those numbers, but 110 more N/A HP is difficult on an engine with as little displacement as the 2.9L. That's almost a 100 percent increase.

The only N/A 2.9L I have read about pushing those figures did it at 7,200 RPM and had a max RPM of 9,000. It had solid lifters and was also used a carburetor. A bottom end to hold up to those RPMs would have to be balanced very well and I imagine the internals were all aftermarket. The only reason they used a 2.9L was because they couldn't use anything with more cubes (rules). But lots of custom parts and money I am sure.

Even 200hp out of a 2.9L is a hard to reach goal. The first 4.0L OHV engines were 165hp. But torque makes the difference. Hense the 215hp 5.0L HO debate, but it almost makes over 300ft/lbs of torque. With new heads, roller rockers, etc, a 5.0L HO can make just under 400hp on a stock cam.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:18 AM.