Miss the 90's and want everyone to know it? Here's your Sport!


Dirtman

Well-known member
EMT / Paramedic
Joined
May 28, 2018
Messages
2,382
Reaction score
715
Points
113
Location
Over there --->
Vehicle Year
2009
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
2.3 (4 Cylinder)
Engine Size
466.63 teaspoons.
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Tire Size
So friggin big!
My credo
Give me money.
I always thought the 2.8 was just a carbed and slightly under-bored 2.9....
 


Rock Auto 5% Discount Code: 248EE46702D889 Expires: October 1, 2019

Bird76Mojo

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
1,662
Reaction score
461
Points
83
Location
Toledo, il.
Vehicle Year
2001 & 1987
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
4.0 V6
Engine Size
4.0 - 5.0
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Total Lift
4" Superlift
Tire Size
33"
My credo
Good enough
Over the years I've seen FAR FEWER failures on the 2.8 and 90% of the ones I heard about were carb related. High mileage, sloppy, worn out carbs.
 

Dirtman

Well-known member
EMT / Paramedic
Joined
May 28, 2018
Messages
2,382
Reaction score
715
Points
113
Location
Over there --->
Vehicle Year
2009
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
2.3 (4 Cylinder)
Engine Size
466.63 teaspoons.
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Tire Size
So friggin big!
My credo
Give me money.
Shhhhhhhh dont talk about bad carbs or youll wake up rusty!
 

Bird76Mojo

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
1,662
Reaction score
461
Points
83
Location
Toledo, il.
Vehicle Year
2001 & 1987
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
4.0 V6
Engine Size
4.0 - 5.0
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Total Lift
4" Superlift
Tire Size
33"
My credo
Good enough
Shhhhhhhh dont talk about bad carbs, 2.9's being complete shit, wiring ANYTHING, electric ANYTHING, or youll wake up rusty!
I feexed for yous
 

85_Ranger4x4

Forum Staff Member
Forum Moderator
Article Contributor
OTOTM Winner
TRS Banner 2010-2011
TRS 20th Anniversary
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
19,809
Reaction score
766
Points
113
Location
SW Iowa
Vehicle Year
1985
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
5.0
Transmission
Manual
The 2.8 would be a blessing compared to the 2.9

As long as it didn't have the A4LD. That would be my only concern if I was paying those high asking prices. Which I'm not. lol

I've already got 3 Bronco II's that I could take my pick from to make an offroad rig. Which I may decide to do in the future. I've caught myself looking at used Ecoboost engines online, so it'll probably happen eventually.
Would be a C5 in '84 so no overdrive either. Looked very solid and if I was more ambitious $800 isn't bad by any means. Paint was faded so it wasn't really new looking but no rust.

I have thought about snagging a V8 Explorer while they are cheap for a family offroad rig. T-bar crank, get the rear end up and insert 33's. Put a real t-case in it and go.

EDIT: went back to drool some more and actually read the description... no engine in it.

I always thought the 2.8 was just a carbed and slightly under-bored 2.9....
Basically yes... after you dig thru the pile of no longer available electrical and vacuum crap to attach a computer to the carb and distributor. Both the bore and stroke is different, I want to say it is an overbored understroked 2.9 but am not positive. The computer carb combines the worst of both systems, all the computer/vacuum crap to screw up with EFI and a carb to do carb things if it wants in one system. Not as reliable as either in their purest form IMO. I still have the Duraspark dizzy from my 2.8 so that part could be dealt with... IMO the base engine is pretty good though, better than the 2.9. I have a hard enough time finding time for what I have though.
 
Last edited:

ericbphoto

Old Redneck just wingin' it.
Supporting Member
U.S. Military - Veteran
TRS 20th Anniversary
Joined
Feb 7, 2016
Messages
2,446
Reaction score
361
Points
83
Age
55
Location
Wellford, SC
Vehicle Year
1993
Make / Model
Ford Ranger
Engine Size
3.0L
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Total Lift
6"
Tire Size
35"
My credo
In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are different.
EDIT: went back to drool some more and actually read the description... no engine in it.

Well, your engine swap is half done already
 

adsm08

Well-known member
Supporting Member
Ford Technician
TRS 20th Anniversary
Joined
Sep 20, 2009
Messages
31,624
Reaction score
1,010
Points
113
Location
Dillsburg PA
Vehicle Year
1987
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
4.0 V6
Engine Size
4.0
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Tire Size
31X10.50X15
That looks like something built in the 90s by someone who missed the 80s.
 

rusty ol ranger

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 22, 2007
Messages
3,823
Reaction score
236
Points
63
Location
Michigan
Vehicle Year
1987
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
2.9 V6
Engine Size
2.9L
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
2WD
My credo
A legend to the old man, a hero to the child...

ericbphoto

Old Redneck just wingin' it.
Supporting Member
U.S. Military - Veteran
TRS 20th Anniversary
Joined
Feb 7, 2016
Messages
2,446
Reaction score
361
Points
83
Age
55
Location
Wellford, SC
Vehicle Year
1993
Make / Model
Ford Ranger
Engine Size
3.0L
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Total Lift
6"
Tire Size
35"
My credo
In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are different.
Oh, no! He's awake!!!
 

rusty ol ranger

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 22, 2007
Messages
3,823
Reaction score
236
Points
63
Location
Michigan
Vehicle Year
1987
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
2.9 V6
Engine Size
2.9L
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
2WD
My credo
A legend to the old man, a hero to the child...
The only real advantage i know of to a stock 2.8 over a 2.9 is a gear driven cam.

If you duraspark it and use a real carburator, i could see it being just as good as a 2.9 since really, they are pretty similar.
 

85_Ranger4x4

Forum Staff Member
Forum Moderator
Article Contributor
OTOTM Winner
TRS Banner 2010-2011
TRS 20th Anniversary
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
19,809
Reaction score
766
Points
113
Location
SW Iowa
Vehicle Year
1985
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
5.0
Transmission
Manual
EDIT: went back to drool some more and actually read the description... no engine in it.

Well, your engine swap is half done already
More than that, the trans/tcase I just took out of my ranger that was behind a 5.0 would drop in. Switch trans, drop in a 5.0 and play.

The only real advantage i know of to a stock 2.8 over a 2.9 is a gear driven cam.

If you duraspark it and use a real carburator, i could see it being just as good as a 2.9 since really, they are pretty similar.
Mechanical lifters so no bad lifter noise and the heads are less likely to crack.

Not sure how many times mine went low on oil and/or coolant, it always kept its fluids separate and kept coming back for more.
 


Top