I'd like to appeal to the collective HAMB knowledge base once more here! Years ago, when I asked about Chevy 2.8 engines, I got some good info, lots of colorfull comments and great ***istance in locating one for my 49 Chevy (thanks again, Kenny!). Now, I ask you about FORD'S little 2.8 engine! I know they were real common in track-t's and rods built in the 70s and 80s, so no doubt that many of the good folks here have had some experience with them! I just bought a lifelong dream car of mine as a project vehicle, and it comes with a partially dis***embled 1974 2.8 Ford V6. What I want to know, is what (if anything?) interchanges between the 1974-78 Mustang II/Capri 2.8 and the Ranger/Aerostar version that Ford dubbed a 2.9 in the 80s and 90s? If my memory serves, the 2.9 had hydraulic lifters, while I know the 2.8s all had solid lifters. Do bellhousings interchange? What about heads? I rmember Roush offering stock replacement heads for the 2.9 that were improved castings compared to the factory design...and they were designed as service replacement heads for Rangers and Aerostars. Do they also fit an earlier 2.8? Anyone here got a good 2.8 short block or long block they wanna sell or trade?!? Will a later 2.9 bolt in??? Let's hear it old-timers...what do I need to know before I rebuild or replce/upgrade this motor??? (No V8 swapping suggestions...that isn't even an option for this car...it's staying V6 powered!) Thanks in advance, everyone!!
I've got....SOMEWHERE...a reference that lays all the differences out. It was very comprehensive. Interchanges, improvements, & so on. I've just spent 30+ minutes looking for the damn thing with no result. Lost in the move, I suppose. I'll keep looking tonight, anyway. If memory serves the heads are not interchangable between 2.8 & 2.9. The Roush heads are, I believe, actually made by World Products....still available. It may be, though, that the reason they aren't "compatible" is because of the exhaust ports; aren't the 2.8 siamesed into two ports vs. three on the 2.9? If the deck height was the same, maybe the 2.9 heads & manifolds would bolt up OK. The exhaust valves are in different locations...so you would have to use a 2.9 cam...but those are chain driven & I'm thinking that the 2.8 is gear-driven. So, you would have to use the chain drive....or, if it can't be made to fit, you would need a custom 2.9 profile (lobe order) on a 2.8 blank, set up for reverse rotation. If all this is accurate, it might be more trouble than it's worth. So far as I know.....the bellhousing patterns for RWD are the same. I believe the mount bosses are the same as well, but I'm less confident on that. Maybe someone else can toss in their better ideas. I'll keep a-lookin'....
This is coming out of left field a bit, but have you thought about the Ford 3.0 V6? A few things are available performance wise (cams, ported heads, distributors). Commonly refered to as Vulcan 3.0 V6's they are very plentiful. They are an iron block, iron head configuration. The engine blocks are pretty much identical no matter what vehicle they went in. FWD/RWD doesn't matter. They put them in Rangers, Taurus', Sables, Mazda B3000 pickups, Aerostar Vans, Tempos, and something else I'm probobly forgetting. They are hella tough. Because they were in Rangers there are auto and manual trans options. Made more power than 2.8 too.
I had an 84 ranger with a 2.8, it had a nylon gear driven camshaft, solid lifters, and compression around 10:1. I decomputerized it using an intake, carb, and dist from a junkyard MII V6. As mentioned, the 2.9s are different and the intakes won't interchange. All the aftermarket heads I've heard of were designed to eliminate the severe cracking problem, and were not high-flow castings. Also think ford motorsports makes an intake, but they're like $300. Mine was a dog, hated it. Low power and head crack prone. If possible, I'd look hard at what else could be used. If you can fit the 2.9, then you can probably fit the 4.0. Now we're talking. Good Luck!
I have an 88 2.8 in my A RPU, Offy 4 bble intake with a 390 Holley, early Mustang II points dizzy with MSD ignition, solid lifter engine etc. I love it, good on gas and plenty of zip in that light little truck. I also have an 88 Ranger 4 spd behind it. I don't know all the interchanges on it, but some hot rod goodies are available.
I used to have an '85 Ranger with a 2.8. Nothing interchanges between a 2.8 and a 2.9 that I know of. Ford stopped using the 2.8 because of m***ive problems with head cracking. That's why World Products released a replacement, there weren't enough good cores for engine rebuilders! Mine had an electronically controlled 2bbl carb, which is generally a bad idea. It had this real rough, deep idle - people thought it was a V8 when it was sitting at a light. Perfect choppy idle, never stalled, got 32mpg - but sounded like a **** kid's truck when you are at anything above idle. I highly recommend you avoid this engine. my .02
Vintage Capri guys mess with these engines a lot. Racer Walsh is a resource for speed parts. Without going into a long speal about the differences, go find yourself the bible on these engines. Covers 2.6, 2.8, 2.9, 3.0, 4.0. (Note not the 3.8 as that was a 90 deg V6) "How to Build and Modify Ford 60 Degree V6" by Sven Pruett
I saw that Offy still offers that aluminum 4v intake and wondered how well it would run with a Holley 390 carb on it! I think at least two companies offer cams for the 2.8, and mine is a 74 engine so it already has the points distributor. The carb that came in the many ***orted boxes of parts is a typical Holley/Webber staged 2v carb like Ford used on their 2.0 and 2.3 litre Pinto four cylinders. At this point, I am trying to figure out if I want to rebuild the dis***embled 2.8, or maybe...MAYBE try to put a later 2.9 in it. I have all the parts, brackets, etc for the 2.8 so I'm tempted to just rebuild the motor I got...how hard can it be, right?!
I really like the Ranger 3.0 engines...they litterally run forever with just basic upkeep...one of the best motors Ford ever designed! If it came down to it...I could almost be tempted to drop a 3.0 in this car if it uses the same mounts and trans bellhousing and stuff....the only sticking point would be modifying the car to include the electronics and fuel system upgrades needed to operate the 3.0 engine's EFI. The 3.0 EFI swap will be a solid "Plan B" notion at this point...but thanks for bringing it up...it's well worth considering!
The 2.6 L engine had siamesed exhast ports. The 2.8 has individual ports. The exhaust manifolds are restrictive. Headers allow for a bunch more power. Offy offered a dual port manifold with either a 2V or 4V top. Back in "the day" the engines were raced alot in Capris. Most of those parts are probably no longer available since the last Capri was imported around '78. It's too bad they've become so rare. I haven't had one in years They were great little cars, except for the ability to rust even in the desert. The fly wheels came in differing hieghts, matching the bell housing. Capri, Ranger Mustang II and possibly Fox body Mustangs may all have different bell housings due to different ****** supliers. That would make using known matching components a huge plus. Hack, It might be a good idea to look at the S-10, 2.8-T5 combo considering common availability of good examples, parts availability and you already have working knowlege of the beast. You might even still have the Edlebrock intake I sold you.
a few points..... 1.) The 3.0 shares it's bellhousing with only the 3.0 from anything I've been able to deduce. The 3.0 and 3.2 SHO engines MIGHT share the same bellhousing as well. The 3.0 DOHC is different and the 2.3 is different (EDIT - the taurus 3.0 DOHC may be the same). It seems it's a one engine as far as I can research so far. 2.) No carb intake was ever offered from Ford. Always was EFI. BUT you could fab a log adapter that bolts on the later lower EFI intake with ease and put 2 stromberg's or holley's on it for a vintage look that also delivered enough cfm for the engine. 3.) Mallory makes a Unilite distributor for this engine. 4.) Roller cams became OEM in the '92 model year (except in the probe) 5.) related to 4.) a guy in Canada called Morana makes a few HiPo parts fo rhte 3.0 Here's a great primer on the engines http://www.babcox.com/editorial/ar/eb90450.htm And if you wonder what a 3.0 with a cam might sound like.... Not my truck... http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=1993888395
Only Ford V6 I know much about is the 3.8. Came in T-birds, Aerostars and who knows what else. Mustangs probably. The T-bird was a fun car to drive, like 3400 lbs, rear wheel drive, good handling, would chirp the tires if you womped on it or cornered hard, and the T-bird we had lasted 180K before it rotted so bad a trailing arm ripped off the mount. It was EFI, but if you could jam that whole works in an older car, you'd have something that would go right along and should get 25 MPG. Maybe better if you hook it to a manual.
3.8.....notorious destroyer of head gaskets. Morana V6 Racing makes parts for them too. '99 and later 3.8's are best. some had counter balencers in them to help with vibes. RWD and FWD 3.8's have different bellhousings. in RWD form (Mustang) they have the same bellhousing as the 5.0. So transmission options are wide open. If you want confusion.... http://www.babcox.com/editorial/ar/ar90134.htm
I liked the early, carbureted 3.8 Ford V6 engines for their simplicity and availability...even if they were kinda doggish in stock form. The Thunderbird SC versions with roots-type blowers and EFI were awesome...one of my favorite motors ever! I'd consider one of those in this car if I ever decided to convert it to a newer motor and EFI, but I think I'll play with what I've got for now! My tow guy dropped the whole mess off at the house this afternoon and I've been at it all night! It was like Christmas morning!! (The car is O/T for here...but I knew some of you would know these engines better than I do...thanks for the input so far...this has been a dream car of mine since I was a kid and I am so stoked to finally have one! I just wanna make sure I know what I'm getting into as far as the motor goes!!!)
I've got near 100 k miles on this one. 1977 Caprii donor Spent the last week R n R ing the transmission for a seized pilot bearing. The nylon cam drive gears will blow up eventually, mine did, I've got an aluminium set in there now. Mike
Cword...where did you get the headers for your motor??? I remember headers being available for 2.8 Capris and Mustang IIs years ago through the common aftermarket header places...but I'm sure they are long outta production now! My car has a new exhaust system on it that mates to the stock manifolds...but both sides run back a ways before going into a "Y"...so I think I could make headers work if I ever found a set! I'm encouraged by your success with that little motor!!!
Fat - Re: 390 on the motor... I did a bunch of such setups back in the 80's; they work fine one the power valve, pump shooters, and pump cam are matched to the motor. The orange cam was the way to go - along with the long shooters to 'aim' the shot at the center of the venturis. The orange cam has a big initial shot and the long shooters get the accel pump charge where it belongs; drop a couple of power valve sizes and you're spot on. Also...If the intake manifold is running a separate EGR plate, the bolt pattern for the EGR plate is EXACTLY the same as a two barrel Holley; I'd get an adapter plate to use as a flange and bolt on a Holley 350. works just as goos as a 390, and allows the use of the stock manifold (if it has the separate EGR plate - a '77-78 feature, if I recall correctly.) BTW - Frank speaks the truth. Check with Racer Walsh; they have a stockpile of 'old' stuff which is not carried in their catalogs - you should be able to get just about anything you need from them.
The headers were an after market set for the Capri, the right side is as it cam out of the box, the left had to cut and modified a bit to clear the steering box in the A ch***is. I built this car between 1981 and 1985, finding the headers then wasn't a problem. I got spooked 2 weeks ago when the pilot bearing seized, my first ***umption was clutch. All my searches have come up dry. I can find a clutch for the four cylinder Capri but not the six. I was sure relieved after I got the ****** out and found I was only in need of the pilot bearing. It was also kind of nice to drop the transmission out of the A without having to remove the engine. ****** wise I've got the original 4 speed from the Capri with a home built shifter. I'd really like an OD gear for highway use, but haven't got around to that. Guess I don't want it bad enough. I changed the carb over to a baby weber, (I want to call it a DC40, close but not right) and have been quite happy driving it for the past 20 some odd years. Mike
I saw a seperate plate for the EGR valve in one of the boxes I was going through last night, and found the stock Holley/Webber carb in the same box. The Holley 350cfm 2v carb is a little cheaper than the 390 4v...and using the stock intake manifold (I think it's aluminum...but haven't dug it out of the box to check yet) would save me a few hundred bucks (those Offy intakes for the Ford 2.8 are pricey!). Thanks for the inside info, Chuck...much appreciated.
I was looking at your trans in the photo, and it looks similar to mine, except for shifter location. (Mine is a Mustang II 4 speed, and the shifter mounts further back than yours is). Something I remember from back in the late 80s/early 90s when my buddies and I messed with old Pintos alot is that a mid 80s Thunderbird Turbo Coupe T5 ****** is a bolt-in swap in a 2.3 litre Pinto, and the five speed ratios really make a big difference in the way the cars drove! I'm not entirely sure that the Turbo Coupe four cylinder T5 will bolt up to the 2.8 bellhousing, but the guy I bought this car from works at Ford, is a Mustang guy, and he says he's almost positive that the T5 swap will work with the V6 as well. Shifter location might be a concern in your application, but you could maybe make a new shifter like you did for the four speed? The headers are probably a worthwhile investment. Motors this small (in displacement) really appreciate all the help they can get! I'll keep my eyes open for a set of 'em collecting dust in a warehouse somewhere!!
No prob! you have to get an adapter plate on account of the sealing flange on the manifold won't mate up with the 350 Holley body; the plate is there to make up the difference. I think I used Trans-dapt plates - and the edge of the adapter plate *barely* sealed on the manifold - but I did two engines that way, and it worked fine. Preferred using the 350 over the 390 on an Offy; the bigger twin venturis gave more of a seat of the pants 'kick' than the 4V carb did - even if the HP numbers were a tad higher with the 390.
Had a 2.8 in a pinto wagon. Can't brag about the gas milage or the two timing gear set it ate either.
You might want to check main/rod bearing availabilty and interchange on the 2.8. I had an '84 ranger 2.8 (wore slap out- pistons literally fell out when the rod caps were removed) for some strange reason there wasn't much of a ridge at the top of the cylinders. The machine shop called me to tell me the block had been changed to a capri 2.8 at some point and the bearings were a different size and no longer available. They offered to line bore to accept the newer size but they also said "dude- go get a new style junkyard block- its gonna be cheaper and you'll be better off" Something about the Capri was of german origin (can't remember for sure) but I want to say the bearings were metric or something. Also I did lose a head gasket after about 40K miles,fixed that then soon after that water started turning up in the oil (cracked head?) so I traded it off. It did have decent power and never once left me stranded- despite the problems.
A few things I remember about them as a Ford mechanic in the 70's is they eat the fiber cardboard cam gears. The crank gear is steel so we would only replace the cam gear under warranty. Another tip when building one is the lifters have to go in BEFORE the head is bolted on. They will not go in after
Yikes! Thanks for the lifter tip!!! I got the car with the motor dis***embled, so wouldn't have known that! I'd heard about the cam gear issues on these motors long ago when I used to work at a parts joint...but I think you could get a metal gear to replace the cam gear if you wanted to. Of course, who knows what's still available and what isn't today?!
Something I can add to the knowledge base now is a tip on points distributors! There are TWO different ones that were used by Ford, a standard-duty, American built Motorcraft single point distributor, and a heavy duty, German built Bosch distributor. It turns out that mine is the Bosch distributor and nothing interchanges between the two. I went to rebuild my distributor after work today and discovered all the parts were wrong! Another trip to the local Murray's Auto Parts got all the right stuff ordered, though...the folks there are becoming invaluable to me since I started this project!!!
the t-5 will bolt right up to a 2.8 v6 if you have the mustang ii bellhousing. i had a list of the parts needed to bolt them together, it uses a lot of ford explorer stuff - pressure plate / clutch disk and a custom throwout bearing. also, i'm pretty sure the input shaft has to be machined down because the pilot bearing in the 2.8 is small i know where you can get the headers also, team blitz sells them but they are pricey, i was quoted $600.oo USD plus shipping, damn, that's alot more than i paid for my car
I was a Ford dealership HD Line tech for many years and as some have pointed out, your engine family began its early life as a 2.6 with two exhaust ports per head (one pair of ports were siamesed). The 2.8 version was the next iteration and it was produced 'til, I THINK, '86 - when the hydraulic-lifter 2.9 was introduced. Then, in 1990, it was followed by the 4.0's - which were released in the Explorers and AWD Aerostars. All 4 of these engines are virtually identical in package size and, AFAIK, mount locations. Since you already have the 2.8, I wouldn't bother shopping for a 2.9 to replace it, if I were you. It's true that the 2.8's had fiber cam gears, but they really didn't cause any probs unless the engine was o/heated - and, altho they were notorious oil leakers (mainly from the fuel pump, oil sender, intake end-seals and v/cov gaskets), at least they didn't crack heads like the 2.9's! There were (and ARE) so many 2.9 Rangers and Bro II's floating around with cracked heads, that no less than 4 different aftermarket manufacturers responded with head castings to replace the Ford POS's! And, the heads didn't crack in the combustion chambers per usual, they cracked under the v/cover and gradually leaked coolant into the crankcase over the years, eventually leading to wiped cam bearings and ticking lifters. The only fix was to completely dis***emble the motor, replace the heads & all engine bearings and the lifters. Very expensive - often more than the trucks were worth. Before ***embling that little booger, however, I would have the heads Magnafluxed just to be sure. If the motor has ever been o/heated - they could be cracked. And, as long as it's apart, install an aftermarket aluminum cam gear. IMHO, the only same-family motor worth swapping for would be the 4.0 - which is a very torquey little V-6, contained in an extremely small package! But, avoid the first production year (1990), cuz a few of those developed cracks in the combustion chambers between the valves. After that, they were pretty reliable (except for the leaking rear main seals, which were subsequently updated). Just my 2¢. C'ya - RAY
another thing: if you're got the engine apart, the 74 2.8 is the low compression block ( 8.2:1), 76 and newer has higher compression pistons (8.7:1). Racer Walsh sells a 9-1 piston also. even swapping the 8.7:1 piston into the 74 block might give a couple hp. also, these heads flow really bad, porting will really help wake up these little motors
The Jalopy Journal
