The newer 3.8's blew head gaskets like no other. Other than that, I don't know of any other problems. I have heard same as you, that it's basically a 302 without two of the cylinders.
Tis quite true, the 3.8 is a 302 minus the rear two. Similar to GM's 4.3 being a 350 missing its rear-most cylinders. Just wedge a 302 in the ranger...it'll be fun .
The older 3.8's did have troubles with that, and if I were you I'd upgrade the head gasket while its out of the vehicle to make things easier. The problem is the weak gasket used in relation to the different expansion properties of the aluminum head and iron block. The aluminum would expand and contract much faster with heating/cooling then the iron would, and with a gasket that wasn't designed for this bad things happened. Otherwise they are a good motor. If you're looking for fun, you might try a supercharged 3.8, though you'll then be dealing with lots of hoses and lines running around plus EFI. Still if I were going to do a 3.8 I'd at least use one with EFI. 200HP and 225 relatively low-rpm (for this size engine) torque.
AWESOME. ONE thread about a 3.8L motor and it gets moved into the 4.2L forum. This motor doesn't belong in this forum. I'd really be happy if it were moved somewhere else, or have it's own forum (if so much gets posted about it!!!). There is already plently of people in the 4.2L forum to make it a forum by itself.
__________________
2005 Ford F-150 Ext. Cab FX4 5.4L
Homer i'd check the title of this forum again if i were you! And if you read the thread he said the 3.8 is in a 83 F100 which BTW Ford did do a few of.
Some people take themselves and forum topics far too seriously. Life is too short to get bunchy about things like this.
The 3.8 stuff is only here until its established enough to split the threads off into their own section. The 3.8 was used in more than one Ford truck/suv application. I assume everyone here is grown up enough to handle that.
__________________
-Ken
Look, I'm gonna have to ask you to go ahead, just come back another time. I got a meeting with the Bob's in a couple minutes.
thank you for moving me but I was fairly certain I only saw the 4.2 and not the 3.8 and thats why i posted in the 302,351,ect..
This motor did come out a F series.
If this had been a stang or t bird or something I wuld have gone somewhere else! I 'am a member of quite a few other forums.
My reasoning for choosing here is that if I go to a cougar forum everyone will be busy asking me what a carburetor is and I assumed there would be some differences between the early truck and the later car motors, also
what i want to know is if the 302 will spin 6000 on a stock bottom, will the 3.8 do the same?
Are there any years with drastically improved... ANYTHING?? heads or such?
I have chosen this for my ranger because the aluminum heads plus aluminum intake plus some headers would be a fairly light engine for being old school!
If a 302 goes 460 then subtract 2 cylinders what is that ? 70lbs , then aluminum heads figure maybe 25 less? then headers take another 20lbs ??
I might end up with a 350 +\- engine? i can probably use a 4 cylinder T5 to save mone y?
Just change the bellhousing to fit the 302 pattern.
I've readthat the 3.8s go about 112 with a carb but thats not that bad if you subtract 25% from the 302s of the same era it's really no different.
plus now I can say it has aluminum heads any everyone will say
thanx for your answers and please don't bash the 3.8 unless its from a technical standpoint
Join Our Site - Its free, quick and easy!
what can you tell me about fords 3.8 motors just like 302 but smaller or no good ??
. 
I 'am a member of quite a few other forums.
and I assumed there would be some differences between the early truck and the later car motors, also 
