 |
|
|
|
|
|
Please do not repost, forward or otherwise publish messages contained in these archives without consent from the respective author(s). These archives may not, in whole or part, be stored on any public retrieval system (FTP, web, gopher, newsgroup, etc.) by individuals or companies, without consent of the respective authors. Received: with LISTAR (v0.128a; list small-list); Sat, 18 Mar 2000 00:12:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 00:12:57 -0500 (EST) From: Ford Truck Enthusiasts List Server To: small-list digest users Reply-to: small-list  ford-trucks.com Subject: small-list Digest V2000 #31 Precedence: bulk ========================================================== Ford Truck Enthusiasts Small Chassis Truck Mailing List Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with the words "unsubscribe small-list" in the subject of the message. ========================================================== ------------------------------------ small-list Digest Tue, 14 Mar 2000 Volume: 2000 Issue: 031 In This Issue: Re: 2.8/2.9 Numbers Re: 2.8/2.9 Numbers Re: 2.8/2.9 Numbers Constipated Catalytic Converters ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 19:16:15 -0800 From: Adam McLaughlin Subject: Re: 2.8/2.9 Numbers Hmm... Thanks Tim. I was just looking to get some idea of how things should go, or would be going. I have a 1989 Ranger with 412,000 miles on it. It has cost us a water pump, a transmission and a clutch. That's it. 2.9, STX, 4x4, manual shift, All options. It too has never seen 3100 RPM, just like the bronco 2. Adam Tim Turner wrote: > Anyone know the factory redline, torque/hp figures w/ RPM for the 2.8 & 2.9? > > Adam McLaughlin > > What are considered mid to high engine speeds? I have never, ever run my > engine > > beyond 3000 RPM. Is this a mid to higher speed? > > Others may disagree but I'd call it solidly in the mid. But then when I'm not > in the truck I like the sound of engines that rev to high limits... (totally > OT, but a rotary engine at 8000 with an unrestricted intake is music to my > ears...) :-) In my 2.8 B-II I might shift at 3000 if I'm in no particular > hurry and up to 5000 If I'm rushed. (6000 If I'm POed!) Not much reason to > go past 4800-5200 though as the HP & torque have started falling way off by > then. > > > > > I am told that I am sacrificing power here, > > A lot depends on the design of the engine though.. just as a generalization > you can have lots of low end torque at the expense of high RPM HP or lots of > HP up high at the sacrifice of low end torque. (One of the reasons for 'high > stall' torque converters; let the RPM come up enough to make some decent > torque at launch) > > On my B-II the emphasis seems to be down low (as it should be for a 4x4) and > it's done making good usuable power at about the same RPM as Kim's 1.5L Capri > starts pushing you into the seat. Of course the redline on the Capri is some > 2000-3000 RPM higher but the emphasis there is quickness rather than 'grunt'. > Shifting the B-II at 3000 probably wouldn't hurt the 0-60 time greatly but I > hate to think what it would do to the Capri's time Vs. shifting at 7000+! > (from 10 seconds to 17?) Made the mistake once of pulling into 60 MPH traffic > in 2nd and it seemed an eternity before it came up to speed. ;-) > > > but I would rather have an engine > > last me forvever than to light then up whenever I wanted. > > Nothing lasts forever! ;-) It's just me but I prefer to push it to the limits > (and beyond!) Of course this may have something to do with why I'm in the > occupation I'm in... bent my fist valve at 17 (1.8 Isuzu.. already 1000 RPM > over redline and go to shift and throttle stuck.. probably in excess of 9000 > RPM when it bent); also my first valve job. > Runner) had a 71 Capri 2L; back then for whatever reason Ford wasn't marking > tachs with a redline so I used it all (8000); only bad effect I saw on that > one was timing belt life measured in months. > > Hmmm.. gonna run for now; big gasoline spill downtown at the HESS plant with > evacuations, drawbridge raised etc.. wonder if it'll make Nat'l news.. (Oh > joy.. spilt gas means even higher prices!) ;-) > > Tim T. > Wilmington NC > > ____________________________________________________________________ > Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://webmail.netscape.com. > ========================================================== > To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with > the words "unsubscribe small-list" in the subject of the > message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 10:10:56 -0800 From: "Jon,Jody" Subject: Re: 2.8/2.9 Numbers Tim Turner wrote: > > What are considered mid to high engine speeds? I have never, ever run my > engine > > beyond 3000 RPM. Is this a mid to higher speed? > > Others may disagree but I'd call it solidly in the mid. I'd have to agree. > But then when I'm not > in the truck I like the sound of engines that rev to high limits... (totally > OT, but a rotary engine at 8000 with an unrestricted intake is music to my > ears...) :-) Dude, you'd LOVE my place then. A shop up the street tests their rotary Mazdas at up to 20,000 rpm! Yes that's 20 with three zero's! When they blow a shift, it gets so high pitched that it hurts! > In my 2.8 B-II I might shift at 3000 if I'm in no particular > hurry and up to 5000 If I'm rushed. (6000 If I'm POed!) Not much reason to > go past 4800-5200 though as the HP & torque have started falling way off by > then. Once again, I agree. > > I am told that I am sacrificing power here, Not if its what works for you.... Blue coyote AKA Jon Turner( no relation that I'm aware of-LOL) Burnaby BC Canada ------------------------------ From: "Mike Haight" Subject: Re: 2.8/2.9 Numbers Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 18:10:17 -0500 It is all relative to the engine, being a "work horse" or a "racer" the condition of your transmission (slippage of gears in auto tranny) and the condition of your foot on the clutch (slippage of clutch in a manual tranny), amongst other things. Typically, 80% of capacity is where peak HP is made. My 2.9L Ranger takes about 3K RPM to get me off a start with a good pace while my 4.6L T-Bird at the same start pace will only get up to 2K RPM to achieve the same torque/speed rating. Thank You, Friend Take Care and Have a Good Day. CUL8R, Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jon,Jody" To: Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2000 1:10 PM Subject: [small-list] Re: 2.8/2.9 Numbers > > > Tim Turner wrote: > > > > What are considered mid to high engine speeds? I have never, ever run my > > engine > > > beyond 3000 RPM. Is this a mid to higher speed? > > > > Others may disagree but I'd call it solidly in the mid. > > I'd have to agree. > > > But then when I'm not > > in the truck I like the sound of engines that rev to high limits... (totally > > OT, but a rotary engine at 8000 with an unrestricted intake is music to my > > ears...) :-) > > Dude, you'd LOVE my place then. A shop up the street tests their rotary Mazdas at up to > 20,000 rpm! Yes that's 20 with three zero's! When they blow a shift, it gets so high pitched > that it hurts! > > > In my 2.8 B-II I might shift at 3000 if I'm in no particular > > hurry and up to 5000 If I'm rushed. (6000 If I'm POed!) Not much reason to > > go past 4800-5200 though as the HP & torque have started falling way off by > > then. > > Once again, I agree. > > > > I am told that I am sacrificing power here, > > Not if its what works for you.... > > > Blue coyote > AKA Jon Turner( no relation that I'm aware of-LOL) > Burnaby BC Canada > ------------------------------ From: "Ron,Marge,Ted" Subject: Constipated Catalytic Converters Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 00:15:09 -0500 Hi All, Since I don't usually drive my wife's 94 Explorer much, it takes me awhile to notice any changes in it. Well it seems to me that it is running kind of sluggish, especially on the hills here in PA. We use to get about 22 mpg on a trip with it, but last weekend, we took a trip and only came up with 18 mpgs! In the past, we had problems with it pinging, so I think I may have over did it with injector cleaner trying to get rid of carbon build-up. My gut feeling is that the sluggish performance and drop in gas mileage may be due to plugged up catalytic converters because of over use of injector cleaners. My question is, is there any way to test for a defective cat converter other than just replacing it? Thanks for any help! Ron ------------------------------ End of small-list Digest V2000 #31 ********************************** ---------------------------------------------------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts Small Chassic Truck Mailing List Covering the Ranger, Bronco II, Exploer and Aerostar Send posts to small-list ....To access the rest of this feature you must be a logged in Registered User Of Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Registration is free, easy and gives you access to more features.
If you are already logged in and are seeing this message, your web browser is blocking session
cookies. Change your browser cookie settings to allow session cookies.
Advertising -
Terms of Use - Privacy Policy -
Jobs
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company. 
|