Forced Induction & N20 Tech General discussion of forced induction and nitrous for the Ford Ranger.

get a whipple or not?

  #1  
Old 10-12-2004
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Woodstock Ga
Posts: 34
i was just reading an old post in the 3.0 V6 TECH forum about how a 4.0L ranger could keep up with a sc 3.0L ranger.. i was thinking about getting a whipple but is it even worth it now? should i jsut go with a bigger sc?
 
  #2  
Old 10-12-2004
Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Fayetteville, NC
Posts: 1,966
Do you have a 3.0? There is no bigger S/C for it, the Whipple is the only supercharger. The whipple makes it faster than a lightly modified which isn't too bad. Seeing how the 4.0 has 53 more hp than the 3.0, thats not too shabby.
 
  #3  
Old 10-12-2004
Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Orange City, FL
Posts: 1,601
IMO I'd jsut buy a 4.0 and mod that, in the next year or less there will be a S/C kit for it as it's going in the base model of the new stang.

With the amount of $$ it costs to buy a Whipple doesn't really enthuse me as to the HP gain you get. Just my $.02 hope it helps.
 
  #4  
Old 10-13-2004
Wowak's Avatar
Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Merritt Island, FL
Posts: 2,223
Seems to me that swapping in a 4.0L costs about the same as getting the Whipple if you do it right, in the long-term I'm leaning towards a 4.0L swap.
 
  #5  
Old 10-13-2004
Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: McKinney, TX
Posts: 2,123
Forget a 4.0l swap. Might as well do a 5.0l swap. It'll cost the same (of course depends on where the engine comes from), but you will have to swap out pretty much the entire drivetrain, wiring, exhaust, probably front suspension, computer. So might as well give yourself 250+ horsepower, unless you have a wrecked 4.0l that can swap everything off of.

And honestly, for probably about 500 less than the cost of a whipple, I just traded in my '03 regular cab 3.0 for a '04 supercab 4.0l. My swap was almost painless... :)
 
  #6  
Old 10-13-2004
Wowak's Avatar
Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Merritt Island, FL
Posts: 2,223
Originally Posted by Mnemonic
Forget a 4.0l swap. Might as well do a 5.0l swap. It'll cost the same (of course depends on where the engine comes from), but you will have to swap out pretty much the entire drivetrain, wiring, exhaust, probably front suspension, computer. So might as well give yourself 250+ horsepower, unless you have a wrecked 4.0l that can swap everything off of.

And honestly, for probably about 500 less than the cost of a whipple, I just traded in my '03 regular cab 3.0 for a '04 supercab 4.0l. My swap was almost painless... :)
Yeah, trading up would be the way to go for a similar vehicle. However, Ford stupidly doesn't offer the 4.0L in a reg. cab Edge. As for the 5.0L swap.. vs. getting junkyard parts from a wrecked 4.0L, it would easily cost DOUBLE to do a 5.0L swap, because everything needs to be replaced, including the exhaust, transmission and most of the drivertrain. All I would need for a 4.0L swap would be the motor and the computer, my transmission is the same one that 4.0L 5Ms use.

The other advantage to a 4.0L swap is that the aftermarket is *starting* to open up for that engine. a whippled 3.0L doesn't have much room to grow.
 
  #7  
Old 10-13-2004
Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: McKinney, TX
Posts: 2,123
Well we know the aftermarket for any ranger engine is small pittance compared to the venerable 5.0l. But yeah, I didn't think about the manual transmissions, I didn't know the 3.0l and 4.0l shared the same bellhousing. What about internals? Just because it bolts up doesn't mean it'll last very long.

But I'm no expert by any means on engine swaps, so I am just making my statement based on numerous other threads like this on other boards.
 
  #8  
Old 10-14-2004
Wowak's Avatar
Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Merritt Island, FL
Posts: 2,223
Originally Posted by Mnemonic
What about internals? Just because it bolts up doesn't mean it'll last very long.
From what I've heard its a mixed bag.. my transmission matches the transmission that comes with the 4.0L.. some 3.0Ls may NOT have that same tranny.
 
  #9  
Old 10-14-2004
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: outside Detroit, where it's safer
Posts: 874
The trans behind the 4.0L is different than the 3.0L and the 2.3L. They are different part numbers and they have different gear ratios. It would probably fail pretty soon after you supercharged your engine, assuming you could get traction. With stock tires and no weight in back, the tires would be the fuse in the circuit instead of the transmission.
 
  #10  
Old 10-14-2004
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Posts: 1,002
Originally Posted by Dave and Julie
It would probably fail pretty soon after you supercharged your engine, assuming you could get traction.
Are you referring to a S/C 4.0 in front of a 3.0 trans, or the S/C 3.0?

Because I thought Whipple tested the durability of the drivetrain components for the S/C 3.0

We're only talking 230 HP.....
 
  #11  
Old 10-14-2004
Mudhippy's Avatar
Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 1,048
okay, how much is the S/C 3.0 anyways and too install. horsepower also?

just wondering
 
  #12  
Old 10-14-2004
Bailey's Avatar
Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,143
http://www.whipplesuperchargers.com/ranger/


$Price: $2495 (black) | $3095 (polished)

and $200 to install I believe
 
  #13  
Old 10-14-2004
Mudhippy's Avatar
Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 1,048
Horse POWER???? How much?
 
  #14  
Old 10-14-2004
Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: McKinney, TX
Posts: 2,123
Stock 3.0l 154 hp 183 TQ
W/ Whipple 230 hp 260 tq
Stock 4.0l 207 HP 238 Tq
 
  #15  
Old 10-14-2004
Wowak's Avatar
Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Merritt Island, FL
Posts: 2,223
Originally Posted by Dave and Julie
The trans behind the 4.0L is different than the 3.0L and the 2.3L.
Ok, then somebody explain to me why the part number on my transmission is the same as on Djayenos' 4.0L?
 
  #16  
Old 10-14-2004
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Woodstock Ga
Posts: 34
damn.. im still iffy bout the sc.. i dont have to money to trade in my truck.. actually i just finished paying it off and i bout it earlier this year.. so im excited. but i love the 3.0L, and i might aswell sc it
 
  #17  
Old 10-15-2004
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: outside Detroit, where it's safer
Posts: 874
Originally Posted by Wowak
Originally Posted by Dave and Julie
The trans behind the 4.0L is different than the 3.0L and the 2.3L.
Ok, then somebody explain to me why the part number on my transmission is the same as on Djayenos' 4.0L?
Different ratios, different gear cuts on first gear. Helical is quieter, but weaker.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
Transmissions
MANUAL TRANSMISSION SPECIFICATIONS
Make/Type Mazda (5-Speed Overdrive) (2.3L/3.0L) Mazda R1HD (5-Speed Overdrive) (4.0L)
Ratios (to 1):
1st 3.72 3.40
2nd 2.20 2.05
3rd 1.50 1.31
4th 1.00 1.00
5th (OD) 0.79 0.79
Reverse 3.40 3.40
Lubricant Capacity (Pt.) 5.6 5.6
Synchronizers Gears 1,2,3,4,5 1,2,3,4,5
Gears: Material Carburized steel Carburized steel
Type Helical 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th & reverse 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th & reverse
Bearings:
Mainshaft Front Single row taper Single row taper
Center Single row taper Single row taper
Rear Single row ball Single row ball
Countershaft Gear Front Single row roller Single row roller
Center Single row roller Single row roller
Rear Single row ball Single row ball
Reverse Idler Gear type Single row roller Single row roller
AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION SPECIFICATIONS
Ford 5-Speed Automatic
Overdrive (5R44-E) Ford 5-Speed Automatic
Make/Type (2.3L/3.0L) Overdrive (5R55-E) (4.0L)
Ratios (to 1):
1st 2.47 2.47
2nd 1.85 1.85
3rd 1.47 1.47
4th (OD) or 4th 1.00 1.00
5th (OD) 0.75 0.75
Reverse 2.10 2.10
Converter 1.80 1.80
Lubricant capacity (pt.) 20 20
Helical gears All All
Oil cooler Water Water
Auxiliary Cooler -14 oz.(1) Oil Oil
 
  #18  
Old 10-15-2004
Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: McKinney, TX
Posts: 2,123
Interesting, i didn't know the 2.3l and the 3.0l shared the exact same specs.
 
  #19  
Old 10-15-2004
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: outside Detroit, where it's safer
Posts: 874
Technical documents aren't always correct, but I'm assuming this information is true.

It makes some sense since the smaller engines have less torque the need more gear to get things moving.
 
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
mcd58
General Ford Ranger Discussion
10
01-23-2012 11:24 PM
Muddy02Edge
2.9L & 3.0L V6 Tech
16
09-08-2005 01:26 PM
BlkTremor02
Forced Induction & N20 Tech
35
04-11-2005 08:27 AM
ToughFord
2.9L & 3.0L V6 Tech
30
02-22-2005 04:54 PM
Warren
Forced Induction & N20 Tech
12
12-08-2004 06:30 AM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: get a whipple or not?


Contact Us - Sitemap - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

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.