302 thread... Specs, years, ignitions, you name it - Page 2 - Ranger-Forums - The Ultimate Ford Ranger Resource


8-Cylinder Tech If you are one of the few with a V8 engine in your Ranger, or if you dream of a Ranger with a V8 engine, this is the sub-forum for you.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #26  
Old 01-25-2009
zabeard's Avatar
who?
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 26,045
um yeah your right i dont.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-25-2009
Sixt9coug's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Norwalk, CA
Posts: 1,034
you can get the MAF roller cam, Forged piston engines out of the 1988-1992 models. Those are the ones to get. You can get basically the same engine out of any 1988- 1992 Lincoln Mark VII. Earlier than 1988, the only Lincolns that had the Mustang spec engine were the Mark VII LSC's but after 88, all the Mark VIIs got them.

Differences are basically the roller cam and the forged pistons.

For the HO engines-

Forged pistons came out in 1985, but they lacked MAF

MAF came out in 1988

Forged pistons went away in 1993.

They were all roller engines (remember, HO engines only! Crown Vics and trucks had flat tappets still)

They arent hard to find.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-25-2009
Toreador4x4's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Livonia, MI
Posts: 3,958
injeced 302, ZF, and a twin sticked np205. you could help everyones false impression of "twin sticked" around here
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 01-25-2009
Toreador4x4's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Livonia, MI
Posts: 3,958
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sixt9coug View Post
you can get the MAF roller cam, Forged piston engines out of the 1988-1992 models. Those are the ones to get. You can get basically the same engine out of any 1988- 1992 Lincoln Mark VII. Earlier than 1988, the only Lincolns that had the Mustang spec engine were the Mark VII LSC's but after 88, all the Mark VIIs got them.

Differences are basically the roller cam and the forged pistons.

For the HO engines-

Forged pistons came out in 1985, but they lacked MAF

MAF came out in 1988

Forged pistons went away in 1993.

They were all roller engines (remember, HO engines only! Crown Vics and trucks had flat tappets still)

They arent hard to find.
trucks had rollers after 1992
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 01-25-2009
zabeard's Avatar
who?
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 26,045
I am not really interested in a manual though. sorry.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 01-25-2009
Level III Supporter
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: usa
Posts: 24,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by zabeard View Post
I am not really interested in a manual though. sorry.
you asked lol.. Justin an me are the manual and old school style lovers! lol
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 01-25-2009
Toreador4x4's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Livonia, MI
Posts: 3,958
Im tellin ya

c6 FTL

Zahnradfabrik Friedrichschafen FTW!
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 01-25-2009
zabeard's Avatar
who?
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 26,045
nah c4 i think


idk maybe ill find a 6.0L chevy and put in it. budget build under 2k and over 380HP
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 01-25-2009
Level III Supporter
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: usa
Posts: 24,936
i think i just had a minor cardio infarction
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 01-25-2009
04blackedge's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (13)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 23,426
I thought you were anti brand mixing beard? Or was that someone else?
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 01-26-2009
rngprerunner's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Beach CA
Posts: 3,453
If the only reason for not running the 4R70 is the VSS you could always run something like I'm running, a ring off of the t-case output... just an option...
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 01-26-2009
t3ob's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Olive Branch, MS
Posts: 1,762
he just made that 6.0 comment to russel feathers (and good job Beard it worked)
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 01-26-2009
t3ob's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Olive Branch, MS
Posts: 1,762
at least I think so...
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 01-26-2009
INT3RC3PTOR's Avatar
Veteran Status Achieved
iTrader: (4)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Minnesooooota
Posts: 8,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by zabeard View Post
oh i cant run a $r70W because I dont have a VSS source for the explorer PCM.
tell you what, i have no speed signal from the rear-end and mine works like a charm
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 01-26-2009
zabeard's Avatar
who?
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 26,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by rngprerunner View Post
If the only reason for not running the 4R70 is the VSS you could always run something like I'm running, a ring off of the t-case output... just an option...
I thought about that as well. I have seen the cramped engine bay with the explorer 302, not much room at all.

I am tossed up about it and which way to go, I think it would be cheaper to go older but it would be better to go with the explorer 302.

Seems like there were a few reasons about the explorer setup. 1 was the vss, the other was something with the ABS, Something the PCM reads off the abs which was different from the ranger.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 01-26-2009
zabeard's Avatar
who?
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 26,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by INT3RC3PTOR View Post
tell you what, i have no speed signal from the rear-end and mine works like a charm
how does that work? i thought the trans would go into limp mode.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 01-26-2009
zabeard's Avatar
who?
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 26,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by t3ob View Post
he just made that 6.0 comment to russel feathers (and good job Beard it worked)
nah i was kinda serious. it would be a cheap alternative to some power! that 6.0 has some guts.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 01-26-2009
JoshK's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: CC, Indiana
Posts: 3,832
6.0 does have some guts.

To me a engine is a engine. Who cares who makes it.

If he never popped the hood of the truck no one would ever know...unless he was running a 350 or another popular engine. They has a distinct sound.

This is a budget build.

$2,000 with the explorer and he has a S/C V-6 Power.

$2,000 with the 6.0 and he has 100 more HP then a S/C V-6 with a lot more tourqe

I vote 6.0 if it fits decent. Outside the frame headers will be needed, but all drag cars do that.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 01-26-2009
04blackedge's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (13)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 23,426
I agree, I would go with the most bang for your buck (which I think is what Beard wants) but thats just me. Use the money left over for something else
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 01-26-2009
zabeard's Avatar
who?
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 26,045
I want simple yet powerful. I want the headers on the inside of the frame not outside. so its got to be somewhat decent in size.

the 6.0 is the same platform of the 5.7 and 5.3 engines. i am not really a chevy guy though.

I have a local guy that would help me build up a 351 which would be a good fit for the truck.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 01-26-2009
seed60's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (15)
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Mooresville, NC
Posts: 5,584
A 351 is a beast. Do it!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 01-26-2009
04blackedge's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (13)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 23,426
How does the 351 compare to the 302 size wise?
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 01-26-2009
zabeard's Avatar
who?
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 26,045
from my understanding just a few inches wider.

a guy quoted me once a 1000 to install a 351 with an AOD and a manual 1356 in my truck. that was parts and everything. should have taken him up on that offer.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 01-26-2009
Level III Supporter
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: usa
Posts: 24,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04blackedge View Post
How does the 351 compare to the 302 size wise?
lol its 49 cubic inches bigger lol...

overall size its just little bigger
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 01-26-2009
Sixt9coug's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Norwalk, CA
Posts: 1,034
2 inches wider at the heads. Its taller as well but i dont remember how much. I want to say about an inch.

Have some fun and find a roller 351W! they are more work to get ahold of than a roller 302 but cubes are fun.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
P300-302-302 mmisk 4.0L OHV & SOHC V6 Tech 29 05-04-2015 10:47 AM
A new pictures thread for the 302 First gen. Lots of pics. nickskates4lyfe Snapshots 26 04-26-2011 06:58 PM
been gone 2 years and out of a RBV for 2 years and i'm ready to be back!!! need help! 93-danger-ranger General Ford Ranger Discussion 10 11-15-2010 03:54 PM
Another 302 into 97 Ranger thread. Benstang220 8-Cylinder Tech 21 08-27-2008 12:44 PM
Changing thread name? Roach2004 Ranger-Forums Office 12 08-20-2005 11:52 PM


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 11:08 PM.


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.