Pirate 4x4 banner

1 - 20 of 39 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,914 Posts
nice and clean I like it
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,381 Posts
'Bout time somebody did the 3.0 swap - that is a tough little motor, RELIABLE, torquey, RELIABLE,and should run a Zuk like a raped ape without the weight issues of a lot of other v-6's. And did I say it was a reliable little booger?
deepmud
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,021 Posts
deepmud said:
'Bout time somebody did the 3.0 swap - that is a tough little motor, RELIABLE, torquey, RELIABLE,and should run a Zuk like a raped ape without the weight issues of a lot of other v-6's. And did I say it was a reliable little booger?
deepmud
What were these things in? Aerostars? Rangers? Taurus?

Weight?

[email protected]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,381 Posts
Ford 3.0 - history and application

The Ford 3.0 came out in 84, I believe, and was built into that crazy weirdo looking future car, the Taurus ( I remember thinking that thing is WEIRD looking - it will never last:D ). And contrary to the usual Ford way of working, it is not the 2.8/2.9(then 4.0) reworked into a 3.0 - the 3.0 Vulcan (they were on some Greek stuff at the time) is a stand alone unit. And if Ford had put that motor in everything, Ford mechanics would be poorer. But Ford did put it in the Ranger, 2wd and 4wd, the Aerostar, 2wd only, the Taurus, the Windstar, and I think 2wd Exploders, and the associated Mercury versions. OH, and the hot rod :flipoff2: 3.0 Tempo.

It is a testament to the reliability that Ford left the motor alone - it only changed the intake manifold in 99 - thats like 15 years without messing with it. And unlike the 2.8/2.9/4.0, it is not known for leaking. Unlike the 3.8/now 4.2, it is not known for cracking heads, leaking gaskets, front timing covers, etc. It isn't known for much mechanical failure at all. There was a recall in 97 Taurus when for changed the cooling design with the newer Taurus - but it was an easy fix.



Weight -This is the a negative maybe - it's all cast iron, so kind of heavy - not like a 4.3, but more than the 2.8/2.9, and maybe even the 4.0, which has aluminum heads. But part of it's value - aluminum and cast iron expand with heat at different rates - it becomes harder to keep seals and gaskets tight when they are working with both materials.

Torque and Horsepower - it varies a bit. By 96 it had 145 [email protected], [email protected] - but it makes good off-road, low gear torque right at idle. Figure a bit less for earlier ones - say a 135 horse maybe. All the models had fuel injection, btw.

I have Ranger 3.0 motor in my back yard - anybody in Alaska want one? I went with the VWTD instead.
deepmud
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,021 Posts
Great stuff Eric!

So what are the transmission options?

Normal Sam/Kick caveat applies: short preferred.

5 speeds?

Autos? Either OD or not?

Divorced vs married t-cases? There were no "good" t-cases behind the Ford trannies, right? Nothing Dana or NVG - just the Borg-Warner clock gear stuff right?

I should check out AA/Novak/etc. for adapters...



[email protected]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,975 Posts
wow.

This has me at a quandry between:

"cool, you certainly can't fault the guy for having the brains and imagination to do whatever the hell he wants to do"

and:

"wtf? why would some guy with this much interest and skill, to quite easily do something like this, pick a 4x4 Samurai-but be seemingly oblivious to actually 4x4ing?"

He obviously knows *about* 4x4's with use of his statements like : "miniature jeep hood hold downs", built a bush bumper when it would have been easier to just have a stock "street" style one, and he went to great lengths (haha there's a pun there somewhere...) to retain the transfer case, (therefor the front drive shaft, therefor keeping 4wheel drive) when he could have had a much easier go with just eliminating these....

But then he goes to great effort to maintain stock ride height, and add wierd airbags in stock spring under ground dragging application, has street tires etc.....

It's possible he just has yet to do any off road mods, but I really doubt it.

Then there are the types who are mega into 4x4's, but are absolutely clueless, with no common sense, and actually make their 4x4's less off road capable, by the very nature of their hideous modifications, sometimes even *removing* their front driveshafts etc...

strange, huh?..... :confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,975 Posts
Re: Ford 3.0 - history and application

deepmud said:
It is a testament to the reliability that Ford left the motor alone - it only changed the intake manifold in 99 - thats like 15 years without messing with it. And unlike the 2.8/2.9/4.0, it is not known for leaking.


Were there various engine options thrown into the mix early on?

I have a Ranger with the little twin plug efi 4 banger, and while researching oil pumps, I came across *something* like: "the v-6 (optional) engine had the oil pump, along with the oil pan gasket revised after some early model year problems, make sure to get these new part #'s when changing out a bad pump or leaking pan gasket"

I think it was maybe the "Ranger Station" or somewhere that I read this, and is it possible I mis-read it somehow?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
221 Posts
I love the 4.0 in my Ranger.. leaky bastard though.. I hope it tows the zuk well.. I think it will lol. That motors been through hell and back.. this is OT but still a ford. ha ha

L8rz

Chris
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
35,608 Posts
I've often thought of something like that but I just wanted a street rod that would do a wheelie on flat ground.

I was think small block v-8, auto tranny and a narrowed rear end.

I thought that is where that guy was going until I saw he kept the t-case. Then I was pondering, WHY? I
t’s not built for off-road, the axles won’t hold on or off, and the tires suspension indicate that he never intends to off-road.

I bet his rear driveline angle is fawked... but it would still be fun/scary to smoke the tires and rip up and down the road.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,381 Posts
Rwd trannies - just the M5OD, 5speed manual , the A4LD/4r44e/5r553 auto - or I think the C-5 can work too - it is short, would be good for off-road - or heck, the motor revs to 5 grand, so the lack of O/D wouldn't really kill it. Are the Borg-Warners really really junk? I actually don't work on them much, and EVERYTHING is 4x4 here if it can be. I wouldn't call them beefy, but strong enough. But, if you adapted the 4x4 M5OD, with is a lot shorter than the 2wd version, with a married Toyota t-case, you should not be much, if any, longer than Suzuki divorced driveline.

It is interesting he wants stock height, but hey, the stock Sam off roads pretty good, really - and keeping it low makes it better for if he lifts it more later for bigger tires - with just fenderwell mods, he could have 31's, low cg, and plenty of power to boot.
deepmud
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
816 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
UZI 9mm said:
wow.

This has me at a quandry between:

"cool, you certainly can't fault the guy for having the brains and imagination to do whatever the hell he wants to do"

and:

"wtf? why would some guy with this much interest and skill, to quite easily do something like this, pick a 4x4 Samurai-but be seemingly oblivious to actually 4x4ing?"

He obviously knows *about* 4x4's with use of his statements like : "miniature jeep hood hold downs", built a bush bumper when it would have been easier to just have a stock "street" style one, and he went to great lengths (haha there's a pun there somewhere...) to retain the transfer case, (therefor the front drive shaft, therefor keeping 4wheel drive) when he could have had a much easier go with just eliminating these....

But then he goes to great effort to maintain stock ride height, and add wierd airbags in stock spring under ground dragging application, has street tires etc.....

It's possible he just has yet to do any off road mods, but I really doubt it.

Then there are the types who are mega into 4x4's, but are absolutely clueless, with no common sense, and actually make their 4x4's less off road capable, by the very nature of their hideous modifications, sometimes even *removing* their front driveshafts etc...

strange, huh?..... :confused:


Well put. Those were my thoughts exactly. Cool or WTF??? This one makes my brain hurt just thinking about it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,381 Posts
It's cool. He didn't make it work worse than stock off road, he engineered it to handle actual off roading ( note the sealed ammo box for the ecm ). If he didn't go where I would have , that is UP with bigger tires, that's ok. I like his engine install - tho' I would like to see a 4x4 tranny (shorter output shaft) with an adapter to marry a Toy t-case.
But like I said, I bailed on the gas v-6 and went turbo-diesel I-4.
deepmud
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,021 Posts
deepmud said:
Rwd trannies - just the M5OD, 5speed manual , the A4LD/4r44e/5r553 auto - or I think the C-5 can work too - it is short, would be good for off-road - or heck, the motor revs to 5 grand, so the lack of O/D wouldn't really kill it. Are the Borg-Warners really really junk? I actually don't work on them much, and EVERYTHING is 4x4 here if it can be. I wouldn't call them beefy, but strong enough. But, if you adapted the 4x4 M5OD, with is a lot shorter than the 2wd version, with a married Toyota t-case, you should not be much, if any, longer than Suzuki divorced driveline.
The BW-1350 had a low of around 2.6:1 if memory serves - there are two different low ranges depending on the vintage/actuation. Something like 2.3:1 and 2.6: or similar.

My B2 had the 1350 push button (electro-mechanical actuation with solenoid). After using it off-road I learned to hate it - it would pop out of low at the worst moments. The lever style probably don't ahve that problem.

I had the t-case apart a few times, between the shift forks (size, design) and the size of the planetary gears I came away non-plus'ed. That being said, probably be way strong for a Sam/Kick.

They are easy to work on... I can buy used up B2s/Rangers around here for the same as a Samurai (i.e. ~$50CDN).

Can't remember - driver's side drop, right?

Is there an adapter for the Toy t-case? Or are you saying make one?
 
1 - 20 of 39 Posts
Top