24 Valve Vulcan - Ranger-Forums - The Ultimate Ford Ranger Resource


2.9L & 3.0L V6 Tech General discussion of 2.9L and 3.0L V6 Ford Ranger engines.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old 07-30-2009
84FordMan's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 119
24 Valve Vulcan

Yeah I know what your thinking, "The Duratec 24V heads won't work noob,". However today, prompted after finding a head from a completely different application will bolt up to my oddball Pontiac V8 in my other vehicle, I took to looking long and hard at the 3.0.

The first similarity I noticed was in the head gaskets. One of these is the 3.0L Vulcan head gasket, the other is from the 3.0 Yamaha SHO engine.




Notice the similarities?

Ok, so what if it will bolt up, what about these extra cams, how do you plan on driving them? Sure the Vulcan is a 3-piece timing chain and the Yamaha is timing belt driven, however the Vulcan and Yamaha share the same diameter crank snout. This means the cogged crank gear from the Yamaha should easily slide in place of the original crank gear. Then it is just the matter of possibly tapping the block to fit the idler and tensioner pulleys.

Once the mechanical is out of the way, then it is onto getting the ECU straightened out. I haven't gotten that far, but what does everyone think?

Reman 3.0 SHO heads are available from rebuilders, like Moore's, for ~240 each (Need to call them and verify if they come with the cams at that price, as the 3.2 SHO heads with cams are $950 each).

OHV to DOHC conversions are really nothing new, Cosworth did a few just from my memory, most prominent one for me being the GM Super Duty four cylinder with a Cosworth 16V head. The engine started life as a 2.5L Iron Duke OHV.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-30-2009
05prerunner's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Apison, TN
Posts: 483
Lol, I actually see nothing in common between the 2... You know the SHO DOHC and the Vulcan 3.0 both share the same bellhousing bolt pattern. Wouldn't it be easier to just swap over the entire engine???

Last edited by 05prerunner; 07-30-2009 at 05:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-30-2009
Pless215's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Dewy Rose, GA
Posts: 473
the similarities i see stop with the pistons are round
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-30-2009
84FordMan's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by 05prerunner View Post
Lol, I actually see nothing in common between the 2... You know the SHO DOHC and the Vulcan 3.0 both share the same bellhousing bolt pattern. Wouldn't it be easier to just swap over the entire engine???
My idols growing up were Herb Adams and Henry Yunick, that should explain it all. If neither name rings a bell, I might as well just stop wasting my breath.

A bit of a sidetrack here, my first vehicle was powered by a Ford 300 inline 6, when I craved more power, I heard the same thing that I heard about my Pontiac 301 V8 and the same thing I hear about the Vulcan, "Swap in a (Insert here over-swapped V8)". Despite some usage in NHRA/IHRA, and some support from Jack Clifford, the 300 was barren ground for performance. The head itself was the biggest bottleneck, the casting and design was just terrible, no amount of porting and polishing was going to fix the problem. In 2003, seven years after the 300 had left production, one owner looked at a cylinder head off of a Chevy LS1 and said, "You know what.. this might just work". A year later, the "FS1" HiBred cylinder head was put into production, took a pair of LS1 heads, hacked them up and put them back together, creating an inline 6 head. INCONCEIVABLE!

So yeah, I kept the Ford 300, when it came time to trade it in, the last dyno put it just north of 200 RWHP (Never got the FS1 head, it was about 7 years too late for me). Which I know is no impressive number by its lonesome, but pair that with the fact the bone stock dyno was 87 RWHP. My Pontiac 301 also remains despite the dozens of "Drop a tree-fiddy in there" comments I get, and the Vulcan will also remain.

So take another look, a closer look, its more than "just the round pistons", nearly all bolt holes match, drains are also very similar.

The more important point is the bang for your buck. How much do Vulcan owners pay for a 20 HP increase?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-30-2009
Rapala's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 826
Sorry to burst your bubble but if you look where I drew the lines you can see that the heads will not match up to the block, it would be like trying to put a square into a circle.

http://s303.photobucket.com/albums/n...adgasket22.jpg
http://s303.photobucket.com/albums/n...adgasket11.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-30-2009
t5cents's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Eureka, CA
Posts: 1,521


Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-30-2009
Rapala's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 826
Thanks, I was trying to get them up but Im being a retard tonight and couldnt figure it out
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-31-2009
bjohnson238's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Muncie, IN
Posts: 732
Yeah, they dont seem to match up at all.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-31-2009
CBFranger's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Tampa Bay Area
Posts: 1,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pless215 View Post
the similarities i see stop with the pistons are round
x2
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-03-2009
SHOBout's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 234
Yea... You try this and show us the results...

Sean
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 08-11-2009
05prerunner's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Apison, TN
Posts: 483
Telling you man, if you want SHO heads, swap in an SHO motor. Its not an "insert overly swapped v8 here" swap. Its something new and different, which from what I can tell, is what you are going after.

Now... in all reality, could it be done??? Im sure it can be. It might cost you $10K in costom machine work to get it all bolted together, and another 1-2K to get it tuned and actually running right. But, bottom line, could it be done? Yes. Is it worth it? No. I can spend $300 and 5 minutes of my time on a decent tuner and get 20 HP. Are you willing to spend literally thousands to get 40- 50? It just ain't worth it.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-11-2009
God,Country,FORD's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Red Oak, IA
Posts: 2,468
just get the new 3.5L ecoboost twin turbo out of the 2010 SHO/ Fusion SVT.. 350HP/375FTLBS torque.. SEXY
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-11-2009
BLK02's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: BC
Posts: 1,350
not even remotley simlilar, I think its pretty much impossible unless you had tons of money into R&D and top level machinery like ford.. just do the entire engine swap imo
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-11-2009
whippersnapper02's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Earth, Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 7,415
Too much thought for a little engine that won't give back much power in the end.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-12-2009
05prerunner's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Apison, TN
Posts: 483
Quote:
Originally Posted by whippersnapper02 View Post
Too much thought for a little engine that won't give back much power in the end.
I agree 100%
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-25-2009
StrangerRanger's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The 253
Posts: 756
Hate to bring this back from the dead... But I'm rebuilding a SHO engine in my shop right now and the block is IDENTICAL to the 3.0. This is the first gen SHO engine however, it is NOT the 3.3. Ford used the 3.0 block and got the heads and intake from Yamaha. The only difference is the clearance pistons.

The heads WILL fit on a newer Ranger block, I tried it yesterday.

Now... somebody else do this that has more free time then me
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-25-2009
84FordMan's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by StrangerRanger View Post
Hate to bring this back from the dead... But I'm rebuilding a SHO engine in my shop right now and the block is IDENTICAL to the 3.0. This is the first gen SHO engine however, it is NOT the 3.3. Ford used the 3.0 block and got the heads and intake from Yamaha. The only difference is the clearance pistons.

The heads WILL fit on a newer Ranger block, I tried it yesterday.

Now... somebody else do this that has more free time then me
And changing the compression height of the pistons will cure the clearance issue.

And as already mentioned, converting over to the SHO's timing belt setup will also be quite simple.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-25-2009
korey89's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: South, FL
Posts: 4,672
waste of energy doing this. why do you need 24v's on an engine that probably wont benefit from it? maybe if the engine was built and had forced induction, but why even do that to a 3.gay? its not like it even revs high or has strong internals. if your goal is power, you would be an idiot to keep either v6. all you would be doing is wasting money in the end.

If you want power, 2.3t or 302
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-25-2009
84FordMan's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by korey89 View Post
waste of energy doing this. why do you need 24v's on an engine that probably wont benefit from it? maybe if the engine was built and had forced induction, but why even do that to a 3.gay? its not like it even revs high or has strong internals. if your goal is power, you would be an idiot to keep either v6. all you would be doing is wasting money in the end.

If you want power, 2.3t or 302
Maybe you should of told Cosworth better than to mess with an anemic 4-cylinder Jeep engine that made 70 BHP from the factory and turn it into a 405 BHP engine that won many IMSA races. Everything you stated about the 3.0, was the exact same story about the Iron Duke, yet it didn't stop GMPP or Cosworth from producing and engine capable of 400+ BHP from 3.0L of displacement across four cylinders all naturally aspirated.



The very reason why the 3.0 can't rev lies in its heads.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-25-2009
HAZZARDJOHN's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Wyoming MN
Posts: 2,400
Screw it all, I I vote LQ4 V8 with L92 heads and an LS6 intake, Guarantee you will have better results (power, reliablility and efficiency), more of a WOW factor, and it will be less of a Hack job.





^ that is just a 5.3 with an LS6 intake and you should see the things this heavy *** ugly car did. all well averaging over 20 MPG. Now with 400 RWHP (what the setup I posted at the beginning has been proven to get) What else do you need?

~HJ

BTW, the LQ4 can be had out of a junkyard for as little as $400
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 11-25-2009
whippersnapper02's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Earth, Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 7,415
HAHA. National Lampoon's Vacation. Love that movie and love the Family Truckster.

And yes V8 FTW. I have messed with V6, 4 banger and Rotary engines. There is nothing like a V8 for power unless you have money for a V10, 12 or 16. So 10K into a 3.slow V6 will get you 500 hp with all the power up top and 10K into a LS engine will get you well over 1000hp with tire shredding torque all throughout the powerband. Cool if you build your 3.slow and I would give you kudos for all your hard work but it still isn't worth it to me. There are 4 and 6 cylinder engines that would be worth building but the Vulcan is not on my list. BTW. I don't think your Cosworth engines would do well on the street.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11-25-2009
Johnbaum13's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 2,343
People have been putting hacked up 351W heads on 300 I-6s for years. Sometimes the build isn't about the most power, sometimes it's about doing it differently. If every body built their power the same way, we wouldn't have the aftermarket that we do. Someone gets a wild hair up their @ss, says I think I can, then does it, and next thing you know, you have a SOHC 427 FE ford motor. I say do it, and show us how well it works.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 11-25-2009
sickranger3.0's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Pensacola, FL.
Posts: 148
or like i have said multiple times. the new duratec line of motor's mostly v6's will pretty much take on most v8's nowadays. run a 3.0L-3.5L duratec. the 3.0L duratecs hold 415whp before needing pistons. 450-500 before needing rods and 1200hp before needing a new crank. built heads, forged pistons and rods and turbo and get even better gas mileage when out of boost then those v8's. new motors are the way to go. the age of old is getting further and further back. that is why i refuse to put a 302 in my truck.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 11-25-2009
whippersnapper02's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Earth, Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 7,415
Oh yeah. Ford finally stepped it up with their new Duratech engines. But there are still better engines out there.

Last edited by whippersnapper02; 11-25-2009 at 01:29 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 11-25-2009
sickranger3.0's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Pensacola, FL.
Posts: 148
of course there are better engines. uh even though its not torquey the new honda k series are pretty insane. But all im getting at is efficiency=power!! and lighter weight adds to that performance aspect. thats why im kinda disappointed that the car industry has not gotten with coates industries and started tooling up for the rotary cylinder head. its a gorgeous cylinder head that reduces the parasitic loss. thinking about it im not really a fan of any 4-5-6-8-10-12-16 cylinder motor its more of if it is efficient enough for the power that it is making.

here are the rotary valves cylinder head that i would love to see get into production
Welcome to Coates International Ltd.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale: ranger 4.0 headgasket valve cover gasket header gasket & viton valve stem seals $10+ talkforparts Interior, Exterior, Electrical, & Misc. 0 07-20-2010 02:41 PM
Who still makes a SC for the Vulcan? Wertzy 2.9L & 3.0L V6 Tech 5 10-22-2006 08:32 PM
Vulcan texasfan1000 2.9L & 3.0L V6 Tech 5 09-18-2006 09:54 AM
Newb question: Vulcan? buzzair 2.9L & 3.0L V6 Tech 8 01-08-2006 08:58 AM
A new V-6? Will they finally kill the vulcan? TremorJon 2.9L & 3.0L V6 Tech 16 12-06-2005 09:02 AM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:34 AM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.