Engine Stay With The Factory 6 Or Go For The 8
- Thread starter 78Cologne
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
- Mar 7, 2002
- 9,432
- 5,380
- 224
Ya i kinda was thinking the same. Just curious of how much power i could pull out of it with a twin turbo set up. Its just finding the right rods and crank for it theres not alot of hi-po parts for the lil thing. I guess 347 stroker in my ranger will be finding a new home. Lol
- Mar 7, 2002
- 9,432
- 5,380
- 224
I was doing some research on the 2.8 back in its day and from what i read they was a really strong dominate race engine for about ten years in some rally style bracket if im looking up the right one. I am just scared of not being able to find some forged rods and crank.
- Mar 7, 2002
- 9,432
- 5,380
- 224
The 3.5 has issues, the 2.0 makes noise or power depending on application, but not both, and the 2.3 sounds so awful that Ford pipes fake engine sounds into the cabin through the radio....
Still wanna put a 4cyl ecoboost in a II.
lol
Now the 2.7... That bish just might keep me from jumping to the Toyota camp for my next truck. It's DAMNED impressive, look for it in an upcoming "F150 Special" in my used car rant thread.
Is it a boosted motor or nat? And how hard would it be to wire up something newer in that old thing i know i would need the computer for it. But where does that leave me with the ignition and tranny for it most of them now days have some type of electronic s in them.
jozsefsz
15 Year Member
Love my '78 v6 with home-grown turbo. This video was my inspiration:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6bq9aOk2qQ
They did this on a 2.9 with stock bottom-end.
Most everyone will tell you to stuff a v8 in there, but that wrecks the handling of the II in my opinion. And I can pick up half a dozen 2.8's from Broncos / Rangers / Aerostars at the scrap-yard for pocket change. So heck with the forged stuff, the stock engine's been fine for me up to ~10psi with no issues at all.
Parts are tough to find, in my case I run the stock manifolds (reversed, exiting up front, the driver-side one replaced with a ranger passenger manifold to clear the motor mounts) and the rest of the pipes are custom. If you want anything on a II you'll be customizing anyways, so what the heck. If you like the motor (I do - gear driven solid cam, awesome lumpy sound for a v6) and a clutch you can actually still find then keep the 6.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6bq9aOk2qQ
They did this on a 2.9 with stock bottom-end.
Most everyone will tell you to stuff a v8 in there, but that wrecks the handling of the II in my opinion. And I can pick up half a dozen 2.8's from Broncos / Rangers / Aerostars at the scrap-yard for pocket change. So heck with the forged stuff, the stock engine's been fine for me up to ~10psi with no issues at all.
Parts are tough to find, in my case I run the stock manifolds (reversed, exiting up front, the driver-side one replaced with a ranger passenger manifold to clear the motor mounts) and the rest of the pipes are custom. If you want anything on a II you'll be customizing anyways, so what the heck. If you like the motor (I do - gear driven solid cam, awesome lumpy sound for a v6) and a clutch you can actually still find then keep the 6.
Last edited:
I was reading a thread about using a 4.0 crank in the 2.8 and making a stroker out of it are u running a 2 or 4 barrel intake? I also read about ford areostar vans having factory headers that will fit on our 2.8. I am tryen to get the money together to buy another ii for parts like the windshield tail lights and gauge cluster from a guy off here. Its got one of the rad 4 speed s in it. That ive heard bad and good things about. Did the 78 have a c3 or 4?
jozsefsz
15 Year Member
I'm actually running the 2 barrel intake with one of those Mr. Gasket 4-2 or 2-4 barrel adapter plates. I thought it wouldn't run very well but it does great. It's topped with a 600cfm Holley 4 barrel home-modified as a blow-through carb with non-functional secondaries essentially (figured I could use it on my v8 at some point). If I'm not wrong the II's had c4's behind the v8 or v6 and c3 behind the 4-cylinder (usually). I've heard the way to tell them apart is that the c3 vacuum modulator faces out towards the passenger side, and the c4 points rearward.
I have the Rad4, it's a decent transmission for its time, definitely shifts a little clunky but it does what I need it to do and it's a few steps above the top-loader 3 speed I had in my '66. A T5 swap is pretty common, but I don't think it's feasible with our bolt-pattern unless they made a manual bell for a 4.0 at some point.
I've not heard of stroking the 2.8, that would be interesting. I imagine a drop-in replacement with a 4.0 would be somewhat simple physically, though they never came without fuel injection so there would be quite a bit involved with that swap. I've never looked into headers, I took this line from an article I read on the Aerostar headers as some pretty good guidance: "Headers don't help Cologne V6's, as the flow problems aren't related to the exhaust." Basically with that Offy intake, cam, and a decent carb, you'll be making much more power. Still it wasn't quite enough for me after seeing that video.
I have the Rad4, it's a decent transmission for its time, definitely shifts a little clunky but it does what I need it to do and it's a few steps above the top-loader 3 speed I had in my '66. A T5 swap is pretty common, but I don't think it's feasible with our bolt-pattern unless they made a manual bell for a 4.0 at some point.
I've not heard of stroking the 2.8, that would be interesting. I imagine a drop-in replacement with a 4.0 would be somewhat simple physically, though they never came without fuel injection so there would be quite a bit involved with that swap. I've never looked into headers, I took this line from an article I read on the Aerostar headers as some pretty good guidance: "Headers don't help Cologne V6's, as the flow problems aren't related to the exhaust." Basically with that Offy intake, cam, and a decent carb, you'll be making much more power. Still it wasn't quite enough for me after seeing that video.
Ya i think stroking the 2.8 would be almost pointless with the lack of air the heads can pull in. I was reading a article and therangerstation about putting a 4.0 crank in the 2.8 making it a 3.5 with a .30 bore. not sure to much about it but from what i read from one of there post someone did it and was having trouble getting it too breath.
I did see a 2.8 stroker on ebay for offroad use. I dont know what kind of power its pushing or if they have a redesigned set of heads that they did in house or from someone it would be nice if someone out there made a nice set of aluminium after markets.with a quick burn chamber. o also about that stroker build i think they was running dodge 4.7 pistons on a 2.9 rod with some lil work to the rod bushing for fitment of the dodge pistons. I think the piston skirts needed trimed down for clearence. The block also needed trimed along with the counter wieghts of the 4.0 crank. I think i was reading it seems like a heck of a Frankenstein build to me. But if the info is true and the parts would work in there. A turbo or even maybe a twin turbo or some type of supercharger might be able to force enough air down them crappie heads.to do some real damage to some v8 out there. Lol
jozsefsz
15 Year Member
eBay for the win, that was exactly my thought, use what I can (the tubing and silicone fittings were aok) and the turbo and bov are still working just fine several years later. it's not the "best money can buy" but it's a good starting point for a project. since flanges are all standard, I can always upgrade if I want. a lot of folks knock eBay turbos, but no one's making a kit for the 2.8L II.
If you're capable of welding up an exhaust from J-bends then it's really not all that hard especially if you stick with the stock exhaust manifolds like I did. I'm sure it's not 100% efficient, but it got me where I wanted to go..
This post goes into some detail about what it took:
https://www.stangnet.com/mustang-forums/threads/78-v6-turbo.880529/#post-8864606
If you're capable of welding up an exhaust from J-bends then it's really not all that hard especially if you stick with the stock exhaust manifolds like I did. I'm sure it's not 100% efficient, but it got me where I wanted to go..
This post goes into some detail about what it took:
https://www.stangnet.com/mustang-forums/threads/78-v6-turbo.880529/#post-8864606
Wow thats a sweet ride. One day mine will be there. My welding skills fall short i have never tryed auctully tried to do it. But i have been turning wrenches since i was 15. And had my first 77 ii. It had the lil 2.3 in it and i give props to the guy who doctored up that lil motor because it had holes in three of the piston one rocker arm off setting on the top of the head. But still would run like it had a fire under it. That is till i brought it home and did a tune up on it. After 3 hours of waiting for the oil to drain and only getting 2 qts of some kind of goo out of it i new something bad was on my way.lol
jozsefsz
15 Year Member
Thank you that's very kind. You'd be amazed at what a pile of scrap it started out as - the interior mismatched and faded (everything you see is vinyl dyed), rotted carpet and seats, and absolutely everything was broken. I mean everything, every single mechanical and electrical part was broken. Name one and I had to fix / change it. It's still a 10-foot beauty - my first attempt at painting a car myself and everything was done as cheaply as possible. It took almost 3 years when all was said & done, mechanicals year 1, interior and paint year 2, and turbo year 3.
My welding's also far from perfect, especially overhead. If it's off the car I can do ok but can never get a decent bead when the parts are anything other than completely horizontal. A project like this is just the excuse to practice!
My welding's also far from perfect, especially overhead. If it's off the car I can do ok but can never get a decent bead when the parts are anything other than completely horizontal. A project like this is just the excuse to practice!
Similar threads
