I am getting ready to rebuild a 2000 3.0 12 valve engine. And maybe give it a little more performance parts with cam,headers,etc. But I also know Ford and Lincoln also make 2 other 3.0s. The Lincoln LS 24 valve V-6 and the cool looking Taurus 24 valve V-6 SHO. Is there very much diffrence in these engines performance wise over the 3.0 12 valve. Should I consider getting one of these to rebuild instead of the 12 valve V-6. Has anyone had any luck with them ?? Looking 4 more information or a website on the SHO

 

I have the slow 145 hp 3.0 motor while a 2000 base 3.0 is rated at 155 hp it probally still lacks. Anyway ford top 3.0 makes 200 hp. The lincoln that yaer makes 205 hp and but is rwd. Check out shoforums.com for more taurus guys, good luck.

 

With regard to the Taurus SHO, I think you are probably talking about the Yamaha-built DOHC 3.0L V6 that Ford used up until 1996. I think it was even stroked to a 3.2L at some point.. It rates as follows: Horsepower = 220 hp @ 6200 RPM; Torque = 200 lb-ft @ 4800 RPM.

The Lincoln LS I think you are talking about (not the brand new one) has a DOHC 3.0L V6 ("Duratec") engine that cranks out 210 horsepower @ 6400 RPM and 205 lbs-ft of torque @ 4750 RPM.

Both the Duratec and SHO engines have 4 valves per cylinder and they both use aluminum heads.

By contrast, your 12 valve 3.0L ("Vulcan") engine does not use aluminum heads and makes 150 hp @ 5000 rpm and 185 lbs-ft torque @ 3750 rpm.

Neither the SHO nor the Duratec will bolt up to a Ranger, as far as I know, and none of the parts from them will fit on the Vulcan.

HTH.

 

They do share bellhousing patterns, they should bolt in. The problem would be exhaust manifolds, intake (the throttle body would be facing back at the firewall), wiring, and the fact that they are a small displacement dohc. In the automotive thesaurus that equals NO LOW END TORQUE. That would not be ideal for a truck, in my opinion.

If you are going to rebuild anyway, just rebuild your 3.0. Do some pocket porting on the heads, and the intakes, make all of you gasket openings match. And get rid of the 50mm throttle body. It is choking the **** out of the 3.0's. Call Charles at Camcraft -http://www.camcraftcams.com/index2.html. For the bargain basement price of $150 he can regrind your stock cam or for $275(that was his pricing 2 yrs ago anyow) he can grind you a brand new billet. Tell him you want the "HP" grind and you will end up with 210/210deg, and .469" lift at the valve with the stock 1.61:1 rockers. JBA now has headers for the new trucks, so you should be all set. I figure my combo is making real close the 200hp and 240#' at the flywheel. The torque is what is really amazing. I pulled a 5000# on a somewhat less than flat road at 45mph in 5th gear at 1400 rpm and maintained speed for roughly 1.5 miles. You will not be sorry if you do the rebuild and do it right, and it will probably cost alot less than trying to put a sho in you truck.

 

Came across some more information on whether a 3.0L SHO engine is worth swapping into a Ranger. Like 3LStroker says, the bellhousing is apparantly compatible with Ranger trannies, but there are other issues to contend with (as he mentioned), and apparantly some new motor mounts would be necessary, as well. Thread on it here.

 

I have a taurus with the 24v and a B3000 with a vulcan. Part of it is surly due to the gearing, but the taurus has way more go than the truck. In response to the "no low end torque" comparitively that may be the case to larger displacement 24v motors, but compared to the vulcan I think it would still beat it by a long ways. The vulcan is often reviewed as being a little down on power, but fine once you get it rolling along. That would translate to me as meaning it needs more low end torque. Something to consider though also is if you are really going to go to town on this engine there is a lot more you can do to the 12v vulcan that the 24v duratec. I would not be suprised if the vulcan came out on top it after cams, headers and such. I don't think you can do these things to the duratec engine. When your done you can do my truck OK.

 

Both engines (12V & 24V) have the same displacement - 3.0L

 

I can't speak for rangers, but i know that the biggest problem for the taurus 3.0 vulcan's are the fuel injector sizes. Ford put in 14lb. injectors stock, which on a naturally aspirated v6 can only support about 150 hp ( which the vulcan puts out stock). There isn't even any buffer built in for clogged injectors, umatched injectors, etc. I have been looking around, and unfortunately the best way to remedy the problem is to put in 19 or 24lb. injectors and get a custom burned chip programmed for the new injector sizes.

 

Bob, I was refering to the statement that the duratec would have no low end torque /b/c it is a small displacement 24v. This could be shown on a dyno and prove me wrong, but my guess would be that even it the duratec is down on torque compared to larger displacement 24v it would still beat the stock Vulcan. Throw an exhaust on a duratec and the vulcan may have it beat since most mods for the duratec help upper range performance. Now I wondering, of course a smaller displacement 24v has less torque. Can someone give some real numbers?

 

Here's an interesting article describing how a Taurus SHO 3.0L engine was converted into a rear-wheel drive powertrain:

http://www.kurtmetros.com/transplant1.html

Notice that a '93 AOD Aerostar tranny was bolted up to the SHO engine using a modified Ranger flex plate.

 

Thanks Joe, that was a great article!!!!

One thing I can't believe.....after that fine piece of engineering,
the guy put a Fram oil filter on it????????????????????? lol!!!