Fredland( I cannot remember the whole website name, I have it saved on favorites somewhere) spent about 10 grand( I am probably exagerrating, but not by much) on the 3.0 in his ranger, and got small returns on his investment, it seems like he got a tenth decrease in quarter mile times, or even smaller. It seems that with the amount of money invested, he could have done a 5.0 swap and been done with it. The 5.0 is not a swap option with the Aerostar, but there might be some useful info on that site.
I am of the mind that a 2.3 T-bird turbo coupe(85-86 5 speed) turbocharger is a doable project for a 3.0 hp increase. there will be some plumbing involved, but with some fuel pressure increase, an exhaust temp sensor to keep track of things,and an intercooler plumbed in under the front with a small electric fan, because I think you will have to lay it flat. Since it will create low boost levels, I do not see what damage could be done with it. I have dabbled around with the thought of doing a twin-turbo setup on my 95 4.0 aerostar(provided I could beef up the rest of the van first, such as the rear-end and brakes) using 2 turbos from an 87-88 turbo coupe(they are smaller than the 85-86) for quick spool-up.
Not serious discussion, just an idea....

 

As a matter of fact, in my opinion, I think the junkyard turbo idea should put to rest any more silly thoughts of "tossing in" a 5.0 engine......

 

I think the homebrew turbo approach is a good one, although finding room for two turbos would be nearly impossible. I think a 4.0 would be a better project engine than a Vulcan, especially with the EDIS ignition.

My thoughts on a turbo 3.0 would be bottom end strength, mainly of the rods and crank. I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who could tell you when you'll throw a rod or crank in a Vulcan 3.0

If you want more power in your Aerostar, go to a junkyard and find a 4.0/5 speed auto combination out of a 97 Aerostar, or Ranger/Explorer. Make this your project engine, and build it as you get deals on parts(turbo for $300, shift module for $50, rods/pistons for cheap)...

I don't think the Vulcan has enough aftermarket, so you would be paying insane prices for custom parts.

 

I agree the 4.0 is the way to go. "There is no replacement for displacement." For all the trouble of replacing the engine, it probably is easier to just purchase an Aerostar that already has the 4.0 in it, although that may limit you to the longer body. As for turbos, I believe most V6s have the splayed crank journals to get even firing. This is a weak point, but it may be OK. I would tend toward the belt driven supercharger to avoid lag and all the heat issues with exhaust driven superchargers.

 

The Idea concerning the turbo was twofold: I have the 4.0 in my 95. My first thought to improving performance was as any normal male would do: put a blower on it!!! I looked around for a blower kit that was compatible with the available space(yes, that is a contradiction in terms) and short of the BBK blower for the ranger/explorer, there is nothing. The most visible drawback with the BBK arrangement is that the throttle body opening is moved from the front to the back behind the blower housing, then moving to the passenger side of the blower. The next negative is that cables have to be moved along with it. Oh, yeah, and you are supposed to do all of this in the same amount of space that is available inside the tape slot of a VCR.

Second thought: the twin turbo plan pretty much eliminates any lag. The IHI turbo on the 87-88 turbo coupe is smaller than most hairdryers(all right, there is some exaggeration, but not very much) and was installed for that same size consideration. The 83-86 turbo coupes (the ones I have driven) take about half an hour to start building boost. Ford's answer to that was to throw on a smaller turbo that would spool up faster. The only downside to that is that you cannot squeeze all that much extra boost out of it, unlike the 83-86 turbos. Sofar as space and heat concerns go, the only reason turbos were thought of is that there is room to work with one, for a 3.0, or two small IHI turbos for a 4.0. The heat concern is negligible, I think some fab work might produce a viable intercooler to go under the nose around the sway bar area(you will not need much of one with this setup) and install a minifan to cool it off. It may be possible also to squeeze one in between the engine fan and radiator. The most difficult parts I see with this are the outlet pipe to the intercooler/intake, and the air intake at the blower. I do not have access to my aerostar at the present time( the wife has it, and I may have to shoot out a tire or two to get her to park it long enough for me to look at it again to make possible revisions to my theory...) Or I could do a better job of marking possible locations and pipe routes......

 

Ok... I like the twin idea, if you find out that it can be done to my 3.0 w/o too much of a problem please let me know b/c I will be all over it, I can see it at the shows now. The TT mini van. Hehe. Well off to the skicker shop time to get that " Not your mamma's mini van" sticker cut for the sides.

93'Aerostar XLT. Cherrybomb glasspack, dual 3" tip, K&N drop in, Super white blikers, fog lights, and headlights, Street Glow kit under it, mutiple neons inside, 1st van in Alababma Custom truck club, oh yeah i run a 11.5 1/8 and mid 16's on my 1/4.

 

I think I would go with a larger single 85-86 5-speed turbo with that engine(the 3.0).I also think that the twin turbo setup would produce a lot more boost than the engine and fuel system could handle That turbo would spool up quicker than it did on the 2.3, and since you will not take the engine very little above 5000 rpm, you should not run out of steam at the top end. Plus, there are kits to increase the boost(I am blanking out right now on what the darn thing is called, such mental blackouts are supposed to be a sign of great intelligence, LOL) so you could work with future power increases. But before any such attempt is made, you need to get your fuel system in order to support the power increase, such as a bigger in tank fuel pump (190 l.p.h., at least), bigger injectors, cooler plugs and an exhaust temp guage, to start off. I think you might also work with the chip guys here to put together something to compensate for ignition boost retard, more fuel, and maybe something random like having all of the warnings lights go off all at once every couple of hours to fool a possible girlfriend into thinking you need to pull over into a secluded parking lot and let things "cool off" for a while, and you are not sure if you will make it home, and that you will be needing emotional support......

 

The problem with the 3.0 is finding parts that can take the power. I'll admit I've never had one of these motors apart, so everything is theory right now, but I don't think the rods on Fords most common V6 commuter car engine are going to be up to the job.

I'd go with a 4.0, just because there are parts available. There are places in Europe you can get a steel crank, and even rods are easier to find.

My big concern with the engine is the short block. I'll be going with a mild engine build, for a maximum of 350hp. I think the stock crank would be able to handle this, but not much more. The rods I'm not sure about, so I'm going to compare them with other rods I can find.

As for the ECU, I want a controller for the stock ECU, but if I can't find it, I'll swap for AC delco. Yeah, I know it's GM, but I can get a controller for it, and the complete cost would be about $300 for stand alone EFI.