ok i have a 1996 kia sportage, 2.0l DOHC, 120 hp 120 ft lbs tq. its my daily driver/camping hunting/ 4x4 vehicle. im looking to make it a dedicated rock crawler/mudder/snow rig. so the plan is to swap out the engine tranny transfer case and axles. i have a 3.8 out of a 1996 windstar that i am considering putting in and i have sever questions i need your help with.

1) is this a good truck motor? i know that it has decent power, especially on such a light vehicle, but where in the rpm curve is the power actually made?

2) what tranny can i run with this motor? i have heard that the 4.2 is just a stroked version, so if i swap out the fly wheel can i run the same tranny and tourqe converter? is there a kit so i could run a c-4 or a c-6? would i be able to run a tranny out of a v-8? i want to run a 203 full time 4x4 transfer case, if i use a 4R70W am i going to be able to find a tailstock to run one?

3)is it possible to swap this motor to carb? i know that the early 3.8 motors ran a two barrel carb for a short while, would it be as easy as swaping on an intake manifold? or is it going to be a huge big deal that costs more than its worth? i would like to get rid of computers if i can, i hate trying to work with them and it would make the swap so much simpler.

thanks in advance for any advice opinons and help offered, this forum is one of the best i have ever used!

 

honestly? not a thing? come on guys!

 

Oops sorry for not repsonding sooner. Been a wee bit busy lately.



the 3.8 is a marginal truck motor, at best - depending on who you ask. the 4.2 is certainly adequate, but the 3.8 is a stretch. It does not make power as low in the rpm as a true "truck motor" does. I don't remember seeing a hp/torque curve for it (I am sure they exist) but I can guess both would peak pretty high up, compared to a 300 inline 6, or even the 5.4 V8. I think redline is about 5500 rpm. At least that is where the electronics cut in and don't let you get any higher.

b) seems like sombody asked about mating the 4.2 to a C4 or C6 a long time ago. I would not base your decision solely on this, but I think it turned out to be a no-go. Heck, anything is possible, but I think it was a case of not being worth it. So far as I know the 4.2 has been mated to the M5OD manual and the 4R70 and 4R100. I think, but can not say for sure, the 3.8 should be able to accept these as well.

c) If it were me, I'd not try swapping to a carb set up. Like I said, anything is possible. I believe '96 is 1st gen OBD, so all the sensors and such might be simpler, but I can imagine it'd be a hassle. Unless, maybe, you got the entire wiring harness and ECU for a carbed 3.8 and tried that.

Given what you have, I'd say your project is doable, but might not turn out exactly as you want it.

Honestly, given what you want, you'd probably be better to find a old, carbed 300 inline 6.

 

I think the FWD 3.8 uses a different bellhousing pattern than the RWD version. The RWD has the same bolt pattern as a 302. You would be better off selling the 3.8 and buying a 4.0 from a Ranger or Explorer IMO.

 

Forgot to say, the 3.8 was used briefly in the F100 during 82 and 83.
You might be able to dig around and find some info specifc to that application that could be helpful.

 

thanks for the reply. ultimatly, i would love to drop in a 4.9 straight six, or even a 302 or 318. but im pretty crunched for room. the four banger takes up most of the room in the engine bay. a smaller or midsized v6 is almost the same length as my inline four, hence the me trying to use this motor. plus it doesnt hurt that its sitting out if my field waiting to be used. i know a straight six or v8 is really the best for what i am trying to do. i just dont have the room to work with without serious modifications to my engine bay, something i am tryin to avoid. you have given me serious food for thought. but it will be two years minimium before i start this build, just want to get everythign researched and together as much as possible now ya know?

 

FYI the 4.0 explorer engine is physically smaller than a 3.8. That would be the way to go IMO.

 

hmm not too fond of those explorers. my parents had one a 91 i think? anyway it was nothin but a head ache. the timing was off and there was no way to time it right again and sensors would go out every week. it was rough. maybe in the laters models the bugs were all worked out

 

Yeah the early models wern't that good. Ford worked the bugs out of them though and the later ones are pretty good engines.