When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
i dont think its only 120 hp...ive heard from more then one site that listed stats on the bronco II that from the factory, its 140. I dont see why here would be only a 5 hp increase from the 2.8 carborated engine. Sence that was only 115. It is .1 liter and and entirely better induction system, im sure there was more gains.
You're right, it's not 120hp, it was 130bhp Sorry about that but the 2.8 was a sad 90bhp. Just curious where are you getting your hp numbers?
Originally Posted by kernel-panic
I think my point was... when it comes down to it, keep it light and build up what you got. (Re-)building a stock 2.9 and opening up the inlet(s) and outlet(s) some will give you enough power and torque... through the right drivetrain... to get you where you want to play. Hell, if a 2.5L iron duke Jeep motor can do the trails in Moab and on the Rubicon... and it's only 4 cylinders...
*shrug*
I agree that any engine can be rebuilt nicely but if you're going to pull the motor and work it over why wouldn't you get something different like a 4.0L that has a LOT more available for it? The 2.9L is a hurting motor for aftermarket parts in comparison. I‘ve got to agree with you on keeping it light though, that’s one reason I’m loosing 2 cylinders.
Now that I've done the research on finding my turbo 2.3 I'd have to say that if I was going the V6 route for a swap I'd have to get a supercharged 3.8L. They're basically a 5.0 with 2 cylinders chopped off and they make more power then 4.0 with ease @ 230 hp and 330 lb ft stock. Now if you were running that kind of torque you'd have to upgrade the rest of the drive train for sure.
My piont was also this, the bronco II has weak axles if you go off roading with bigger tires. The 1990's explorer,and ranger has the better ones, as well as a better suspendtion.So if you take the time so get the front and rear axles of that to fit, if the motor from that is good and it dose bolt right into the 2.9's place then why not do it. If you take that much time and you have the front axle already removed making the swap that much easier to work with then i dont see why you should not do it unless your afraid of wiring. I am most likey putting the btter axles in from a donor truck like this so yeh. Unless i come across one for cheap but has a shot motor then ill just re-biuld and clean up the 2.9. Also the idea of beating ricers sounds awesome, on straight aways at least. lol
also as i found out, the number of cylinders dont matter. Ask Osin...his turbo bronco will have like 220 hp or more. And thats 2.3 i think. The new evo has 350 HP. Its pretty amazing
What kind of cars will you find the 3.8 in? Maybe if i came across somthing like that, i could do that instead.
That engine was in the SC thunderbirds from 89-95. The earlier ones made a little less power but still very impressive. Even the early 89 SC made like 315 lb-ft of torque at 2600 rpm. Now that would be a BII that would turn some heads!
2. Dose the engine ans trans bolt into the bronco II like the 4.0
3. Did they come in 5 speed, if not would a 4.0 trans bolt to and hold this 3.8?
Don't know anything about their bellhousings but I just found a couple good running donor cars on ebay for less then 1K. Looks like finding a SC 3,8 is easier then a turbo IC 2.3. I'm sure that with the trans you'll want something tougher anyway, we'll just have to figure out what can be used.
1) The 3.8 used a Windsor bellhousing pattern (that equals tons of 5.0 type options).
2) The 3.8 and 4.2 are basically the same engine so any 4.2 trans and transfer case would work too.
I personally think this would be one killer rig. Without a doubt you'd give the 5.0 guys a run for their money. You'd be using less engine room and have less cooling issues. Maybe when the IC 2.3T BII is done I'll have to build one of these SC 3.8s too. LMAO, I have way more ideas then $$$. The more I look at this the less I like the 4.0 swap. Sure the 4.0 is a great motor and physically a better fit but the SC 3.8 has like twice the power stock and has that 5.0 bellhousing pattern. The trans and transfer case options are almost endless.
Do you think the a 5.0 tranny will bolt up? I dont care about what motor i get at all. All i am afraid of is welding mounts for i have NEVER welded before. I guess if i do do this then i will have to get somone who can. Do you know if the 3.8 will use the 2.9 mounts in the bronco II without modifcation?
Also where are you find this info, so i can look too. Both of us can find more if we both search. ( i know what your saying about the ideas to money ratio, mines like 1:15000, with 1 being money and 15000 being expensive ideas)
Do you think the a 5.0 tranny will bolt up? I dont care about what motor i get at all. All i am afraid of is welding mounts for i have NEVER welded before. I guess if i do do this then i will have to get somone who can. Do you know if the 3.8 will use the 2.9 mounts in the bronco II without modifcation?
All Windsor transmissions bolt up including 5.0s.
Originally Posted by bronocIInoob
Also where are you find this info, so i can look too. Both of us can find more if we both search. ( i know what your saying about the ideas to money ratio, mines like 1:15000, with 1 being money and 15000 being expensive ideas)
where do i check for PM's hence the name broncoIINOOB lol
Also i dont know if this is what you ment by bolting up, but what i ment is like the mounts for the transmission to the chassis. There are mounts right? or is the motors bellhousing all that dose it. If so do you know if the trans will "fit" in the place of the stock one without getting in the way of stuff.
im confused, the pm you send me seems to not have shown up, there was one for boush proformance that was an ad for F-150 superchargers that i deleted, and one the has the date 12-31-1969 that i cant open. what is going on?