V6 vs V6
Thread Starter
|
Elder User
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 647
Likes: 3
From: Brumley, MO
V6 vs V6
Ok I am looking for a cheap 4x4, and Rangers and Bronco II's are pretty slick and economical. I actually know someone with a 90 or 91 Bronco II with a bad 2.9 V6, very nice BII one of the best looking I've seen, the only things that suck are auto tranny, and push button 4x4. I know that the 2.9 and 4.0 have the same bolt pattern, but which one is really the best? I may or may not buy the Bronco II in question just depends on if I can find a better buy on the Ranger side of things.
Thread Starter
|
Elder User
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 647
Likes: 3
From: Brumley, MO
Looking at the power numbers the 2.9 has more HP and TQ per liter than the 4.0, but really the 4.0 has more HP and TQ per liter than a stock 302, but most people would still rather have a 302 in a Ranger or Bronco. So which one is better, should we go economics, which one gets better fuel economy, and which one is more reliable. I know the 3.0 liter V6 is a dog, is the 2.9 worse than the 3.0? According to the fact that the 2.9 has more low end torque and both are rated for 170 TQ, but the 2.9 has it 400 rpm lower than the 3.0. Of course this is a 4.0 vs 2.9.
Hotshot
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 12,170
Likes: 5
From: The hills of No. Calif.
The 2.9 is of course a direct bolt-in. The 4.0 will physically bolt right in but the auto tranny used behind the 2.9 is weaker than the 4.0 unit and won't last long behind a 4.0 (it's the same tranny, but the 4.0 version had some stouter internals. It can be updated, but it's an expensive tranny to have worked on.) Also, you need to do some computer and wiring changes to fit the 4.0. It's worthwhile to do it all though, especially if the BII is as clean as you say and can be had for the right price. Personally, I would pick up a 4.0 complete with 5-speed tranny and swap it all over at once.
The 3.0 is a great engine in a lighter vehicle. Used to have a Taurus with the 3.0 and it hauled butt...however, stick one in a heavier vehicle like the Ranger/BII and it becomes a dog. It also wont bolt up to the 2.9/4.0 bellhousing.
However, the 2.9 isn't really a bad engine. It's just got a few character faults like being prone to noisy lifters. I have only driven two. My dad had an '88 BII 2.9 4X2 with 5-speed. It drove great and had good power with no lifter noise while my '89 Ranger 2.9 was 4X2 with auto and was gutless and noisy. It only got 14-17 MPG which I hope to improve on a little with the addition of a 5.0/5-speed. (Which is another option for you...though not the cheapest and easiest one!)
The 3.0 is a great engine in a lighter vehicle. Used to have a Taurus with the 3.0 and it hauled butt...however, stick one in a heavier vehicle like the Ranger/BII and it becomes a dog. It also wont bolt up to the 2.9/4.0 bellhousing.
However, the 2.9 isn't really a bad engine. It's just got a few character faults like being prone to noisy lifters. I have only driven two. My dad had an '88 BII 2.9 4X2 with 5-speed. It drove great and had good power with no lifter noise while my '89 Ranger 2.9 was 4X2 with auto and was gutless and noisy. It only got 14-17 MPG which I hope to improve on a little with the addition of a 5.0/5-speed. (Which is another option for you...though not the cheapest and easiest one!)
Last edited by TigerDan; Aug 9, 2007 at 08:35 AM.
Thread Starter
|
Elder User
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 647
Likes: 3
From: Brumley, MO
I guess thats one vote for the 4.0. So is the 5 speed they put behind the 2.9 strong enough for the 4.0? Do the 4.0 and 2.9 have the same motor mounts too? I really don't like the little short wheelbase of the BII's kinda scary like a CJ-5 or something, I think a 2.9 would be more than enough haul *** for me in something that tipsy, the 4.0 would be overkill I think, but it's probably the better thing to do. In a Ranger however a 351w would be pretty sweet, but a 4.0 would do just fine. BTW just in case I find a 2.8 carb motor do the 2.9 and 4.0 bolt in place of it to?
Hotshot
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 12,170
Likes: 5
From: The hills of No. Calif.
The 5-speed tranny (M5R1) that was in common use by '90 is the same for 2.9 or 4.0 and is a good, stout tranny. Motor mounts should be the same as well.
As for the 4.0 SOHC, as I understand it, it almost fits. There's one bolt that's slightly off which can be either left out or the tranny redrilled to fit it.
As for the 4.0 SOHC, as I understand it, it almost fits. There's one bolt that's slightly off which can be either left out or the tranny redrilled to fit it.
Senior User
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
From: Manitoba Canada
The bell housing bolt pattern is identical between the 2.8, the 2.9 and the 4.0. As far as fly wheel balancing, I'm not too certain. As for transmission choices, there are others that have yet to be brought up. Nobody ever thinks of the C4 transmission. It can be found in Pinto/bobcat's and Mustang II chassis. It's a stout transmission by it's self. Now, build it to 302 specs and it's purt near bullet proof. Then there's the other idea. Advanced adapters makes a kit to mate a 700R4 transmission to the V6. I'm not to certain on the particulars, but from what I can understand, it's a costly conversion. Personally, if I was doing a 4X4, I would most likely choose the C4 trans just because of the parts available for it. Everything from mild to wild. For that matter, you don't need to really go nuts with it. It's quite strong in factory trim. As far as a transfer case, well, I believe the sky is the limit again. Just my two CANADIAN cent is all.
Trending Topics
Hotshot
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 12,170
Likes: 5
From: The hills of No. Calif.
Yes, the C4 is a good tranny...but one of the things dwrestle mentioned in his first post was the word "economical" and in order to keep the gas milage reasonable in a Ranger/BII I feel it's important to have an overdrive. The O/D was shot in my A4LD in my Ranger, which is what contributed in a major way to my mediocre milage. And I think an automatic has too much parasitic drag for a small engine. Most folks report substantial gains in performance and milage with a 5-speed over an auto. (Plus, they're just more fun to drive...!)
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Top 10 Fords at 2026 Carlisle Ford Nationals
Joe Kucinski
3 Best / 3 Worst Parts of Modern Ford Ownership
Brett Foote
10 Amazing Upgrades That Solve Common Ford Truck Owner Headaches
Pouria Savadkouei
Every 2026 Ford Engine Explained
Brett Foote
10 Ugly Ford Trucks That We Still Kinda Love
Joe Kucinski
10 Things Every Truck Owner NEEDS (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Senior User
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
From: Manitoba Canada
I agree with the economics of the manual trans for "mileage" part of the economics. But when you look at the cost of re-building a C4 over an A4LD, Hands down, the C4 is cheaper to repair. Even if you look at the manual transmission in comparison to the C4, the C4 wins again. I guess I'm looking at long term and the abuse side of it.
Thread Starter
|
Elder User
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 647
Likes: 3
From: Brumley, MO
Are all the auto's from the BII's the A4LD? The one I am talking about has a column shifter which is pretty rare to see I think most BII's I have seen had the floor shifter. Of course most I have seen were 88 and down. I think there is another BII behind my house(junk yard) it is a 80's model and if it hasn't been crushed yet I might see if there is anything I can get from it. I have to make sure the family that goes to my church didn't get rid of the 90's model BII, they never get rid of any other car that quits running.
Thread Starter
|
Elder User
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 647
Likes: 3
From: Brumley, MO
Frail how? Like you better be easy on it with a V6, or you better be easy on it with a V8 swapped in it's place. Just tring to figure out what you mean by frail. I know a buddy of mine has a 93 Ranger 4.0 auto, 4x4, super cab, and it has never given him trouble, and he ain't easy on it(at least he wasn't when we were in high school). This guy had a Vette and the Ranger, he sold the Vette, but he kept the Ranger, so they must be good. I know of two Ranger's in my town that aren't being used both 80's vinatge both 4x4's(gotta be for me), I don't know why they aren't being used, so what if the one I want to check out has a blown motor, say it's a 2.8 V6, could I swap in a 4.0, and make it carbed to avoid a wiring nightmare, or is this a stupid idea that will leave me with no power, and even more headache, or will it be almost as sweet as EFI? What if one of them is a 4 cylinder, I might have to make a 4 vs 4 topic.
Senior User
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
From: Manitoba Canada
Ok, First off... the A4ld and it's derivatives do not have a good track record even behind a V6. Ask any reputable transmission shop and they will agree to it. That doesn't mean that they won't put up to some abuse. Now, your idea of making a 4.0 a carbed engine isn't a good one. nobody makes a manifold for one. that doesn't mean that one couldn't be made but it's far more economical and reliable to keep it as a FE engine. Honestly, if you think about it, swapping a complete fuel injection engine is only a matter of three or four wires to make it run. To top it off, you will be able to squease more power out of it as a fuel injected engine and maintain reliability. If your really interested in keeping it carbed, swap in a 2.8 or go all out and do a 5.0 swap. Believe it or not, the 5.0 (302) is an easy swap. Since you brought up the idea of a 4 banger swap, some people have even gone as far as swapping in a merkur XR4TI engine complete with the injection and turbo. Some, have even gone as far as swapping in a 5.4 triton. The sky and your imagination are your only limits when swapping. If you look in the tech section on this site, there are directions for doing the 5.0 swap. It should give you some ideas.
Hotshot
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 12,170
Likes: 5
From: The hills of No. Calif.
I wouldn't go so far as to say the 5.0 swap is easy (and I'm pretty well-versed in it) but it's certainly easier than shoehorning a 460 or a Triton V10 into a Ranger...
But it also depends on just what your goals are, as well as the Ranger being used for a starting point. The easiest swap, in a nutshell, would be: carbed 302/5.0 with automatic tranny into a carbed Ranger with no A/C or power steering.
Being almost finished with mine, I could fill you in on details if you wish...
But it also depends on just what your goals are, as well as the Ranger being used for a starting point. The easiest swap, in a nutshell, would be: carbed 302/5.0 with automatic tranny into a carbed Ranger with no A/C or power steering.
Being almost finished with mine, I could fill you in on details if you wish...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
dehumanization11
1983 - 2012 Ranger & B-Series
1
Jun 2, 2010 06:57 AM
