Ford-Rangers.com Ranger Forum HomeFord-Rangers.com Ranger Forum Home
Home Recent Topics New posts Search search Menu menu Not logged in - Login | Register

Ford-rangers.com is a discussion forum, a Ranger forum for people who have questions about fixing or modifying
their Ford Rangers or people who just admire their Ranger. Please join and enjoy sharing experiences!

98 ranger v8 swap       #: 509
 Moderated by: Mike69, MaDMaXX, Page:    1  2  Next Page Last Page  
New Topic Reply
 Rate Topic 
 Posted: Sun Jan 21st, 2018 11:26 pm
PM Quote Reply
1st Post
Mr.x
Member
 

Joined: Sun Jan 21st, 2018
Location:  
Posts: 5
Name: 
Occupation: 
Interests: 
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 5
Good evening people of the internet, today I have question about a possible swap on my 1998 Ford ranger. To be more specific it's a 1998 Ford ranger XLT stock with a 2.5l engine rwd 5speed manual and coil suspension. I have a donor engine witch is from a 2002 Ford explorer Eddie Bauer rwd with a 4.6L v8 engine 5speed automatic . Is this swap possible. Or if there any other v8 engine that would be easier to swap.any help will be greatly appreciated. :frd

Last edited on Sun Jan 21st, 2018 11:27 pm by Mr.x

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Sun Jan 21st, 2018 11:40 pm
PM Quote Reply
2nd Post
Dusten
Member


Joined: Sat Jan 13th, 2018
Posts: 614
Name: 
Occupation: 
Interests: cars, trucks, running ...
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 614
The 4.6 is a huge engine that doesnt make good power.  The 5.0 is a much more common swap.  If you do some searching on Google you'll find a million articles on how.  



____________________
2001 Ford Lightning - Built Motor - Built Trans - 2.9 Whipple - E85 - Custom Interior - 537/632 - 11.40 @ 119.6(old setup)
1968 Ford Mustang "Gold Nugget Special"
2018 Ford Mustang GT PP1
1999 Ranger
https://www.youtube.com/user/lightningdusten
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Mon Jan 22nd, 2018 06:25 am
PM Quote Reply
3rd Post
JAMMAN

Owns A Torsen


Joined: Mon Sep 18th, 2017
Location: Grove City, Ohio USA
Posts: 6429
Name: Jim ...
Occupation: 5 axis cnc programmer ...
Interests: RBV's ...
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 6429
People have done 4.6 swaps but it requires extreme inner fender and other mods. It can be done but it is a BIG project and should only be done if you have a good lift or a BUNCH of buddies to move the cab and the bed around. And a pile of money.

Dustin you can get substantial HP out of the 4.6 it's a great motor it just don't fit nicely in a ranger.



____________________
00 XLT 4WD RCSB 3.GO! Jalapeño
01 XLT 2WD RC Steppie 3.0 auto Silver
The future belongs to those who show up.
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Mon Jan 22nd, 2018 08:12 am
PM Quote Reply
4th Post
Scrambler82
Old Bastard !


Joined: Fri Dec 22nd, 2017
Location: California USA
Posts: 2108
Name: Grev B ...
Occupation: Quality Assurance Engineer ...
Interests: Rangers, Photography, Metal Bending ...
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 2108
Mr.X,
I know there is a natural instinct to go for the newest engine design, keeping up with technology an all, maybe even better gas milage, but in this case, as said above, it isn't the easiest fit !
In fact you may need to design new motor mounts, Explorer's might fit, in the header department... not even sure there is a set of headers that will work with 4.6L, another design nightmare, and then the newer transmissions, electronics, and so on and so on !

The 5.0L, is like... the Ranger was designed with that engine in the minds of the engineers, the engine is the perfect size, there are Headers for the swap, Monster Header, and all of the transmissions for the 5.0L can be run without a computer. There are a number of aftermarket engine harnesses to chose from, the best one used to be from Ford, three wire hook up !

A 5.0L will produce as much power as you want, build it for high rpms and it will scream, they do 9 second ETs in Stangs, and then there is the lower rpm approach, build it to run around 3000 rpms all day long.
How much HP are you thinking... have you thought about Torque... torque is the thing that gets you moving, the actual power of the engine, so think about it and compare the two engines.

The main thing to think on are, how easy will it fit, how easy will the wire hook up be, what headers, what trans, will there be enough room for the radiator, and other small things that may pop up. The 5.0L has a problem with the heater housing, what will the 4.6L has interference with the same heater housing; sometimes it is far better to stick to something that works !

AND... when I put a '93 5.0L, in my '88 Short Bed, Std Cab Ranger STX, it was a whole new feel to the truck, and I got better mpg from the 5.0L than I got from the 2.9L that came out.

Read some of the postings on the 5.0L and the 4.6L installs, not only on this site , if there are any, but on other Ranger sites that have been around for a while and I believe you will find the best route to be the 5.0L.

Wondering about the weight, I don't know what the 4.6L weighs in at !

Good Luck with this project, read, look, and read some more, until you know what parts each swap will need, what you will be getting yourself into !



____________________
Ltr,
2003 EDGE, Std Cab, Steppie, E4 Red, 5sp, 4x
5" SuperLift, 33" x 12.50 x 15"
Hurst Shifter
Mod'd Backrack to fit Steppie
Front and Rear Bumpers by Custom 4x4 Fabrication, OK; now Mike's Welding and Fabrication.
Working on more Mods, just need more time, longer days would work !
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Mon Jan 22nd, 2018 09:36 am
PM Quote Reply
5th Post
Dusten
Member


Joined: Sat Jan 13th, 2018
Posts: 614
Name: 
Occupation: 
Interests: cars, trucks, running ...
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 614
Having been around they modular world for as long as I have I know what it takes to make power with a mod motor.  The heads, even the best after market versions are trash.  A sbf with make substantially more power per dollar, and per cubic inch.  300hp na out of a 4.6 is a big deal with 2v heads  300hp na out of a 302 is  easy with just heads and a cam.  



____________________
2001 Ford Lightning - Built Motor - Built Trans - 2.9 Whipple - E85 - Custom Interior - 537/632 - 11.40 @ 119.6(old setup)
1968 Ford Mustang "Gold Nugget Special"
2018 Ford Mustang GT PP1
1999 Ranger
https://www.youtube.com/user/lightningdusten
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Mon Jan 22nd, 2018 01:21 pm
PM Quote Reply
6th Post
aroundincircles
Member
 

Joined: Sun Nov 19th, 2017
Posts: 361
Name: 
Occupation: 
Interests: 
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 361
I've really want to see a Coyote motor in a ranger... any idea on its dimentions vs the 302 or 4.6l?



____________________
https://aroundincircles.net/
1998 Mazda B4000
Mesa, AZ
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Mon Jan 22nd, 2018 01:26 pm
PM Quote Reply
7th Post
Dusten
Member


Joined: Sat Jan 13th, 2018
Posts: 614
Name: 
Occupation: 
Interests: cars, trucks, running ...
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 614
Ask and ye shall receive

Attachment: hrdp-1306-02+ford-coyote-engine-swap-guide+how-the-coyote-measures-up-graph.jpg (Downloaded 103 times)



____________________
2001 Ford Lightning - Built Motor - Built Trans - 2.9 Whipple - E85 - Custom Interior - 537/632 - 11.40 @ 119.6(old setup)
1968 Ford Mustang "Gold Nugget Special"
2018 Ford Mustang GT PP1
1999 Ranger
https://www.youtube.com/user/lightningdusten
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Mon Jan 22nd, 2018 07:10 pm
PM Quote Reply
8th Post
V8 Level II
Member


Joined: Tue Dec 5th, 2017
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 118
Name: 
Occupation: 
Interests: 
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 118
I don't know where they measured to get the "Classic Ford V8" numbers. 

For comparison, these are the 
width dimensions listed in the Ford Racing Performance Parts catalog:

Pushrod:
  • 302: 18 3/4"
  • 351W: 21"
  • 460: 26"

OHC:

  • 4.6L SOHC: 25 5/8"
  • 4.6L DOHC: 30"
  • 5.0L Coyote: 28"
I measured my Explorer 302 and it is just under 19" across the valve covers. Based on that, I'd place more trust in the Ford Racing numbers.



____________________
2003 FX4 Level II, Supercharged 5.0L V8, Headers, Duals, BW4406 manual T/C
Aussie Locker, Torsen L/S, 4.10's, Bilstein 7100 rezzies, Cadillac/Mustang rear discs, Duff traction bars
Keypad Entry, Lock LEDs, sway bar discos, Heated seats, Explorer EATC, Trip Computer and consoles

Other rides:
2016 C-MAX Energi (plug-in Hybrid)
2011 Taurus SEL (highway cruiser)
2003 Ranger 2.3L M5ODR1 Regular Cab (drudge)

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Mon Jan 22nd, 2018 07:26 pm
PM Quote Reply
9th Post
Tsquare
Member


Joined: Fri Nov 10th, 2017
Location: Suwanee, Georgia USA
Posts: 1540
Name: 
Occupation: Controlled Insanity ...
Interests: 
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 1540
Also notice the weight of a 302 vs the 4.6L. An extra 140 pounds is a lot of extra weight. Always remember the higher power to weight ratio is usually quicker.

Something else to think about is that 300+HP in a Ranger starts to get really hard to plant that much power to the ground. Limited slip or a posi-locker is also a must.



____________________
Tony
NE ATL
'04 XLT regular cab 3.slo stepside
Semi retirement
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Mon Jan 22nd, 2018 08:39 pm
PM Quote Reply
10th Post
V8 Level II
Member


Joined: Tue Dec 5th, 2017
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 118
Name: 
Occupation: 
Interests: 
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 118
This picture has been passed around the forums for years and it makes the point quite well. The engine on the left is the 4.6 DOHC and the one on the right is a 5.0 (302) pushrod. Going by FRPP's dimensions, that would be 30" wide vs. 19".
 
4.6's, both SOHC and DOHC, have been successfully swapped into Rangers. There's at least one Coyote swap out there as well. The ones I've seen were done using relocated steering and A/C delete. 


For ease of installation in a Ranger while retaining A/C, the 5.0L pushrod engine is the hands down winner, especially the Gen2 Explorer variant. That's why you see so many more of them than any other Ranger V8 swap.





____________________
2003 FX4 Level II, Supercharged 5.0L V8, Headers, Duals, BW4406 manual T/C
Aussie Locker, Torsen L/S, 4.10's, Bilstein 7100 rezzies, Cadillac/Mustang rear discs, Duff traction bars
Keypad Entry, Lock LEDs, sway bar discos, Heated seats, Explorer EATC, Trip Computer and consoles

Other rides:
2016 C-MAX Energi (plug-in Hybrid)
2011 Taurus SEL (highway cruiser)
2003 Ranger 2.3L M5ODR1 Regular Cab (drudge)

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Mon Jan 22nd, 2018 09:08 pm
PM Quote Reply
11th Post
Scrambler82
Old Bastard !


Joined: Fri Dec 22nd, 2017
Location: California USA
Posts: 2108
Name: Grev B ...
Occupation: Quality Assurance Engineer ...
Interests: Rangers, Photography, Metal Bending ...
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 2108
V8LvLII,

Wow, I have never seen the two engine next to each other, the 4.6 almost looks twice as wide !



____________________
Ltr,
2003 EDGE, Std Cab, Steppie, E4 Red, 5sp, 4x
5" SuperLift, 33" x 12.50 x 15"
Hurst Shifter
Mod'd Backrack to fit Steppie
Front and Rear Bumpers by Custom 4x4 Fabrication, OK; now Mike's Welding and Fabrication.
Working on more Mods, just need more time, longer days would work !
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Mon Jan 22nd, 2018 09:45 pm
PM Quote Reply
12th Post
JAMMAN

Owns A Torsen


Joined: Mon Sep 18th, 2017
Location: Grove City, Ohio USA
Posts: 6429
Name: Jim ...
Occupation: 5 axis cnc programmer ...
Interests: RBV's ...
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 6429
I moved this to the V8 forum because it is starting to gather an amount of tech info.



____________________
00 XLT 4WD RCSB 3.GO! Jalapeño
01 XLT 2WD RC Steppie 3.0 auto Silver
The future belongs to those who show up.
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Tue Jan 23rd, 2018 11:51 am
PM Quote Reply
13th Post
V8 Level II
Member


Joined: Tue Dec 5th, 2017
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 118
Name: 
Occupation: 
Interests: 
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 118
Wow, I have never seen the two engine next to each other, the 4.6 almost looks twice as wide !

To be fair, the engine on the left side of the picture is the 4.6L DOHC which is 30" wide. The OP asked about the 4.6L SOHC which is over 4" narrower than the 4.6L DOHC but still almost 7" wider than the pushrod 260/289/302. It is not impossible to
 successfully swap a 4.6L into a Ranger engine bay but the extra width does add to the complexity and complicates retention of the heat and A/C.



____________________
2003 FX4 Level II, Supercharged 5.0L V8, Headers, Duals, BW4406 manual T/C
Aussie Locker, Torsen L/S, 4.10's, Bilstein 7100 rezzies, Cadillac/Mustang rear discs, Duff traction bars
Keypad Entry, Lock LEDs, sway bar discos, Heated seats, Explorer EATC, Trip Computer and consoles

Other rides:
2016 C-MAX Energi (plug-in Hybrid)
2011 Taurus SEL (highway cruiser)
2003 Ranger 2.3L M5ODR1 Regular Cab (drudge)

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Tue Jan 23rd, 2018 04:56 pm
PM Quote Reply
14th Post
NoPower

Don


Joined: Fri Oct 20th, 2017
Location: Grove City, Ohio USA
Posts: 590
Name: Don ...
Occupation: Retired ...
Interests: Grand Kids,Car Shows,DYI projects ...
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 590
My 4.6 is putting 525 H.P at the rear wheels

Last edited on Tue Jan 23rd, 2018 04:57 pm by NoPower



____________________
1984 ElCamino (Show Car)
2000 Mustang (Show Car)
1995 Chrysler Concord belong to Earl
2014 Ford Escape SE 1.6 Turbo
1958 Wife (Arm Candy)
15 Grand Children
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Tue Jan 23rd, 2018 07:43 pm
PM Quote Reply
15th Post
Dusten
Member


Joined: Sat Jan 13th, 2018
Posts: 614
Name: 
Occupation: 
Interests: cars, trucks, running ...
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 614
NoPower wrote: My 4.6 is putting 525 H.P at the rear wheelsNot without extensive work, I a package that likely won't fit in a ranger without extensive work.  Dollar for dollar and lb for lb the sbf is better than a 2v mood motor.  
Hell my mod motor makes 540 through a big auto and pushes a 4700lb deep into the 11s but a sbf would do it easier and cheaper.

Attachment: 20160525_173818.jpg (Downloaded 82 times)



____________________
2001 Ford Lightning - Built Motor - Built Trans - 2.9 Whipple - E85 - Custom Interior - 537/632 - 11.40 @ 119.6(old setup)
1968 Ford Mustang "Gold Nugget Special"
2018 Ford Mustang GT PP1
1999 Ranger
https://www.youtube.com/user/lightningdusten
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Tue Jan 23rd, 2018 10:13 pm
PM Quote Reply
16th Post
Tsquare
Member


Joined: Fri Nov 10th, 2017
Location: Suwanee, Georgia USA
Posts: 1540
Name: 
Occupation: Controlled Insanity ...
Interests: 
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 1540
What was amazing about the first gen modular engines is that they were extremely de-tuned from the factory. A 5.4 that was rated 260 hp with the addition of a cold air intake, e-fan kit, custom tune (flip chip), and cat-backs could have 330 hp at the rear wheels. My 99 F-150 was a test vehicle for one of the local speed shops stage 1 performance kits set up this way.

To get more out of them required cams, headwork, headers, and/or forced induction. A buddy of mine had a 99 XLT 5.4 that had the aftermarket Lightening kit that pumped 570 hp to the rear tires.

To get big HP all you need is $$$.



____________________
Tony
NE ATL
'04 XLT regular cab 3.slo stepside
Semi retirement
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Tue Jan 23rd, 2018 11:03 pm
PM Quote Reply
17th Post
Dusten
Member


Joined: Sat Jan 13th, 2018
Posts: 614
Name: 
Occupation: 
Interests: cars, trucks, running ...
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 614
Tsquare wrote: What was amazing about the first gen modular engines is that they were extremely de-tuned from the factory. A 5.4 that was rated 260 hp with the addition of a cold air intake, e-fan kit, custom tune (flip chip), and cat-backs could have 330 hp at the rear wheels. My 99 F-150 was a test vehicle for one of the local speed shops stage 1 performance kits set up this way.

To get more out of them required cams, headwork, headers, and/or forced induction. A buddy of mine had a 99 XLT 5.4 that had the aftermarket Lightening kit that pumped 570 hp to the rear tires.

To get big HP all you need is $$$.
I'd like to see some proof considering a stock lightning only makes 350-360.  



____________________
2001 Ford Lightning - Built Motor - Built Trans - 2.9 Whipple - E85 - Custom Interior - 537/632 - 11.40 @ 119.6(old setup)
1968 Ford Mustang "Gold Nugget Special"
2018 Ford Mustang GT PP1
1999 Ranger
https://www.youtube.com/user/lightningdusten
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Tue Jan 23rd, 2018 11:10 pm
PM Quote Reply
18th Post
Mr.x
Member
 

Joined: Sun Jan 21st, 2018
Location:  
Posts: 5
Name: 
Occupation: 
Interests: 
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 5
I appreciate the feedback and your comments.
I really just wanted a v8 on the ranger because I like how the one my Ford explorer runs, I was hoping it would be easy swap but it seems like that's not the case. Although I like the coyote swap idea I only seen automatic rangers but no manuals swaps.

Last edited on Tue Jan 23rd, 2018 11:10 pm by Mr.x

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Wed Jan 24th, 2018 07:30 am
PM Quote Reply
19th Post
chris

Wrench spinner


Joined: Thu Oct 5th, 2017
Location: Leigh On Sea
Posts: 635
Name: Chris ...
Occupation: Retired ...
Interests: Science, technology, horses ...
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 635
How many bhp an engine can produce is pretty irrelevant since 99% of the time you are probably only using a fraction of that on the road - I have a 6.5 ton lorry with a 4 cylinder 4 litre engine that produces a mere 85 bhp and it drives just fine....

I also have a 1 ton MGB with a 3.6 litre V8 that produces 200 bhp I very rarely use more than a quarter throttle, maybe 50 / 60 bhp.

The best things about the V8?? - the burble exhaust note and no need to change gear so often, it will do 30 mph to 120 mph in top gear.



____________________
MG power
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Wed Jan 24th, 2018 07:20 pm
PM Quote Reply
20th Post
Tsquare
Member


Joined: Fri Nov 10th, 2017
Location: Suwanee, Georgia USA
Posts: 1540
Name: 
Occupation: Controlled Insanity ...
Interests: 
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 1540
Dusten wrote: Tsquare wrote: What was amazing about the first gen modular engines is that they were extremely de-tuned from the factory. A 5.4 that was rated 260 hp with the addition of a cold air intake, e-fan kit, custom tune (flip chip), and cat-backs could have 330 hp at the rear wheels. My 99 F-150 was a test vehicle for one of the local speed shops stage 1 performance kits set up this way.

To get more out of them required cams, headwork, headers, and/or forced induction. A buddy of mine had a 99 XLT 5.4 that had the aftermarket Lightening kit that pumped 570 hp to the rear tires.

To get big HP all you need is $$$.
I'd like to see some proof considering a stock lightning only makes 350-360.  
I would refer you to Dan Troyer who did the work but he his no longer around. 



____________________
Tony
NE ATL
'04 XLT regular cab 3.slo stepside
Semi retirement
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Thu Mar 1st, 2018 12:56 pm
PM Quote Reply
21st Post
Scrambler82
Old Bastard !


Joined: Fri Dec 22nd, 2017
Location: California USA
Posts: 2108
Name: Grev B ...
Occupation: Quality Assurance Engineer ...
Interests: Rangers, Photography, Metal Bending ...
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 2108
Mr X,

Was wondering how this is working out for you ?

What engine does your Explorer have, that you like the feel of ?

The Explorer 5.0L-W, has plenty of HP and torque (although low) to move a Ranger along at any highway speed you need and the low end power is more than adequate for the Truck use.  If you can keep your foot out of the firewall then you can actually get a reasonable mpg.


My first 5.0L-W swap was in an '88 STX, I ended up with better mpg than the OEM 2.9L we swapped out but the 5.0L-W swap in a '98 needs a little more attention than the '97 back do, so chose wisely.

I am at this time trying to figure out how to get a 5.0L-W in my '03 Ranger using "non-Torque Monster Headers" AND pass the local emissions testing.

Post up where you stand, what your choices are, and approximate cost of both !



____________________
Ltr,
2003 EDGE, Std Cab, Steppie, E4 Red, 5sp, 4x
5" SuperLift, 33" x 12.50 x 15"
Hurst Shifter
Mod'd Backrack to fit Steppie
Front and Rear Bumpers by Custom 4x4 Fabrication, OK; now Mike's Welding and Fabrication.
Working on more Mods, just need more time, longer days would work !
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Thu Mar 1st, 2018 08:35 pm
PM Quote Reply
22nd Post
black06xlt
Coal miner


Joined: Sat Nov 25th, 2017
Location: Flushing, Ohio USA
Posts: 1738
Name: 
Occupation: 
Interests: my wife my kids ford rangers ...
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 1738
Scrambler82 wrote:
Mr X,

Was wondering how this is working out for you ?

What engine does your Explorer have, that you like the feel of ?

The Explorer 5.0L-W, has plenty of HP and torque (although low) to move a Ranger along at any highway speed you need and the low end power is more than adequate for the Truck use.  If you can keep your foot out of the firewall then you can actually get a reasonable mpg.


My first 5.0L-W swap was in an '88 STX, I ended up with better mpg than the OEM 2.9L we swapped out but the 5.0L-W swap in a '98 needs a little more attention than the '97 back do, so chose wisely.

I am at this time trying to figure out how to get a 5.0L-W in my '03 Ranger using "non-Torque Monster Headers" AND pass the local emissions testing.

Post up where you stand, what your choices are, and approximate cost of both !

a friend of mine had an 01 ranger we put a 302 in it a used shorty headers for a fox body mustang they were unequal length bbk for 79-93 fox mustang some slight notching of the frame to clear the collector flange was done on both sides but the fit was great and you could easily remove the headers with the engine in the truck. i will try to get some pics of the truck. as far as passing emissions with the proper catalytic converters that should be an easy task to complete. along with a good carb set up or efi



____________________
1995 ranger splash (pieces)
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Sun May 6th, 2018 09:45 am
PM Quote Reply
23rd Post
410customs

Idahome


Joined: Wed May 2nd, 2018
Location: Panhandle, Idaho USA
Posts: 2165
Name: Jamie ...
Occupation: Elevator Design Worlds Tallest Buildings ...
Interests: Ranger Based Vehicles and OFFROAD ...
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 2165
I am at this time trying to figure out how to get a 5.0L-W in my '03 Ranger using "non-Torque Monster Headers" AND pass the local emissions testing.

What local emissions testig do you have to pass?

The last year of the 302 was 2001
Most states with emissions will not allow you to put a 01 engine into a 03 truck and still pass the truck must be a 01 model year no later

Now with that said we can put a 5.0 drivetrain into an 03 truck, just don't expect a referee to sign off on it
The ranger changed very little from 98-2011

Torque Monster headers are awesome, not sure why people want to stay away from them. Ditch the gaskets and hardware he ships them with and you are good to go! I have removed and resealed TM's in the truck several times its not that difficult
Drivers side is hardest but still a 3-6 hour job not a project killer!
There are other manifolds that will fit as well if you just hate tube headers all together

Last edited on Sun May 6th, 2018 09:47 am by 410customs



____________________
I build custom RBV, specializing in drivetrain conversions, wiring, suspension and complete custom trucks
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Sun May 6th, 2018 09:58 am
PM Quote Reply
24th Post
410customs

Idahome


Joined: Wed May 2nd, 2018
Location: Panhandle, Idaho USA
Posts: 2165
Name: Jamie ...
Occupation: Elevator Design Worlds Tallest Buildings ...
Interests: Ranger Based Vehicles and OFFROAD ...
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 2165
There is a Lincoln Aviator for sale here in town....drool drool drool over that Cobra 4.6 in there I would love to stuff it in a Ranger....



____________________
I build custom RBV, specializing in drivetrain conversions, wiring, suspension and complete custom trucks
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Wed Mar 25th, 2020 08:28 pm
PM Quote Reply
25th Post
Scrambler82
Old Bastard !


Joined: Fri Dec 22nd, 2017
Location: California USA
Posts: 2108
Name: Grev B ...
Occupation: Quality Assurance Engineer ...
Interests: Rangers, Photography, Metal Bending ...
Status: 
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: 2108
black06xlt wrote:

a friend of mine had an 01 ranger we put a 302 in it a used shorty headers for a fox body mustang they were unequal length bbk for 79-93 fox mustang some slight notching of the frame to clear the collector flange was done on both sides but the fit was great and you could easily remove the headers with the engine in the truck. i will try to get some pics of the truck. as far as passing emissions with the proper catalytic converters that should be an easy task to complete. along with a good carb set up or efi

black06xlt,

Was wondering if you got the name of the headers and pictures of the truck used in the Swap you mentioned back in Mar of 2018 ?

I have some Summit Truck Headers, shorties, and I always thought they would work but alas... I have never got to the swap.

Thx / Ltr



____________________
Ltr,
2003 EDGE, Std Cab, Steppie, E4 Red, 5sp, 4x
5" SuperLift, 33" x 12.50 x 15"
Hurst Shifter
Mod'd Backrack to fit Steppie
Front and Rear Bumpers by Custom 4x4 Fabrication, OK; now Mike's Welding and Fabrication.
Working on more Mods, just need more time, longer days would work !
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

Current time is 05:49 am Top Page:    1  2  Next Page Last Page    

Ford-Rangers.com Ranger Forum > Ranger Engine Tech > 8 Cylinder Gasoline > 98 ranger v8 swap

Users viewing this topic



PHP Version: 8.2.28
Server version: 10.6.21-MariaDB
UltraBB 2.01.01 Copyright © 2008-2025 Jim & Chris
Page processed in 0.1033 seconds (36% database + 64% PHP). 110 queries executed.