85lebaront2

It could probably be done, but you would need a running, or previously running, truck with the EcoBoost powertrain as a donor vehicle, one totaled by either being hit in the rear or rolled so that all the front end area is good. You will need the complete powertrain, radiator, intercooler, all the underhood wiring, computers etc. You will probably have to buy a bypass module for the anti-theft system. Fuel pump, later Ford systems are "returnless" and the fuel pressure is monitored and sent to the computer via a fuel pressure sensor. The pumps are what is called "pulse width modulated" where the computer essentially controls the fuel pressure by how long the power pulses are in relation to the off pulses. 100% is full power, 50% is half power. This allows the computer to control the fuel pressure rather than having a mechanical fuel pressure regulator. On a forced induction system the delta pressure (fuel pressure over manifold pressure) is maintained at a constant value. An example, my turbocharged Chrysler 2.2L runs 55 psi static or delta pressure, at high vacuum conditions this may drop to 33 psi, under 15 psi boost, it climbs to 70 psi. I believe the EcoBoost engines are direct injection (right into the cylinder) and may run much higher. Motor mounts would probably have to be custom, easiest way would be to find a way to attach the EcoBoost truck's perches to your frame.

Ok, transmission is probably a 5R55E, not one of Ford's "better ideas" they made a 5 speed from the 4 speed by playing around with the shift sequence to supposedly get rid of a large jump in gear ratios. If it is the 4R55E you are better off. The 4R ratios are 2.47, 1.47, 1.00 and 0.75:1, 5R ratios are 2.47, 1.87, 1.47, 1.00 and 0.75. The way it gets the 1.87 is by "split shifting the gearset. Good friend had one in an Explorer 4.0L, started slipping on the 2-3 shift. You will definitely need the engine computer from the Ranger, the B2 probably had the A4LD (predecessor to the electronic ones). If you can find copies of the Ford EVTMs at your library or on eBay you will be way ahead to invest in them.

Ok, update, spoke with Glen at EGR brakes this morning, they are machining a pair of deep top hat rotors, the ones the U-Haul E350 DRW and motorhome E350 cutaways use. This should move the calipers in far enough to clear the wheel. Hopefully the caliper mounts will work without any changes. He is sending a "call tag" for the other rotors. I will post the outcome once everything is done.

Biggest thing I see is the same problems I ran into on my upgrade from a carbureted 460 to MAF/SEFI along with the dash and steering column changes. Your 1987 is a pretty straight forward truck, fairly basic design with only one power feed to the ignition switch, the wipers are probably a knob that turns one way for low and high, the other way for interval. 1997 the steering column and ignition switch are completely changed, 1997 has 4 separate power inputs from a single 60 amp fuse in the PDC, the 1987 switch has two inputs from a spliced yellow wire, circuit 37. You can take one of the 1997 yellow wires (bigger the better) to feed your ignition switch. Wipers, do not try to use the relays in the PDC, simply use your old wiper system, 1997 uses a body computer for the wiper control. Power locks, again, if the Bronco has them keep those, it is easier unless the Ranger has the remote keyless entry and keypad. Starter, again, keep the B2 system rather than deal with the Ranger stuff, if you have to use it, it can be fun.

Ok, first question, where are you getting the wiring diagrams? Second, B2 1987, originally 2.9L correct? Manual or automatic and what transmission are you using on the swap? In the mean time I will try to look at a few things on the wiring for you.

Last time a Ranger was included would have been 1981? The last year it was on a full size truck.

I can get them off AllData, my 1996 EVTM does not include the Ranger, only F-series and Bronco.

Nice looking truck! Are you planning on keeping the complete 1997 system? If so then you will need all 3 O2 sensors (easiest way would be use the pipes and converter from the ranger) If you are not, you will need the computer from the 97 as it is a DIS system (triple coil, firing two plugs at a time). If not you will probably need to see if your 2.9L distributor will work in the 4.0L block. If you stay with the 97 computer, but will not have all of the OBD-II stuff the EEC will need to be reflashed to reflect the changes.

Sorry I'm not closer, as Gary pointed out, rewiring something is not alien to me. I guess it was too many years spent mumbling obscenities at Joe Lucas, prince of darkness.

Pictures need to be less than 500 mb in size so you will need some way of resizing them. Connectors, if you need some, first get an on-line version of the Motorcraft wiring pigtail catalog. I have it, also lots of salvaged connectors and part numbers for aftermarket sources for the pins/sockets for them. One very important item, sensor string voltage is very low (5 volts) so any extra resistance will give you screwy results. I soldered every connection, and if I spliced a wire I used heat shrink over the splice. Good luck with it! If I can help (from a distance) let me know.

I'm thinking Bronco II, and his donor is a 97 Explorer. You might be right on that, I just never heard it as B2 (one of our companies former owners builds B2s) the one that is just a giant wing. I hope he's not using the OHC one, but if he is, he would be ahead of the game to replace all 3 timing chains (and I thought a Lotus 1600 or Toyota 8RC had weird timing chain systems).

Aside from cops and the occasional overdose of bath salts or meth, nothing can stop Florida Man! I'm guessing some of the above was involved. It could have been Margaritaville.

My feeling from what he says is a 4.0L V6 into what I would think is a Mazda B2? maybe B2000? If it is and had the Mazda 2.0L it is nothing like the old German 2.0L in the original Pinto. Those were interesting, Kent (British) 1.6L or optional Cologne (German) 2.0L. The Kent 1.6L was a pushrod crossflow head engine and the Cologne 2.0L was an OHC crossflow head engine, FWIW, the 2.3L is somewhat based on the Cologne engine.

Yes, it seems that way. I got real proficient at tearing down and resealing the left side on Darth's original axle. FWIW, changing the gear set to the later long pinion design does not necessitate hub disassembly, just pulling the axles far enough back to get the differential out.

Gary, I have it and the one that preceded it in pdf form and can email them to you. The tool kit for the Sterling says "1985 1/2 special tools. The reason you will want to check the TSB is it addresses the leak problems with the rear wheel seals on the full floating hubs. Seal design was changed from a standard style where the rubber seal runs against the axle tube (first change was to a "multi-lip" design) the final update went to a seal package where both the part in the hub and the part on the tube are fixed and the actual seal is encased in metal and pre-lubed. The actual seal is available from Amazon in the Motorcraft PN. I will get you that PN also. Keep in mind I have been dealing with these fun issues for a bit over 25 years.

Further progress or lack thereof on the disc brakes. First item, rotors would not fit on the adapter pilots, holes were 4.9" ID, adapter pilots 5.46" OD. Had to wait till Tuesday (8/5) to drop them off. Picked them up Wednesday AM and put the right side together in the afternoon less seal so I could check runout. Runout was .007", desired .005" max. Thursday tried old trick, marked rotor and adapter and turn the rotor 180°, runout is now .002". Pressed in new Motorcraft seal (Gary, read TSB 94-19-24 before working on BBs rear hubs) and assembled the completed hub and rotor and adjusted the bearing play. I went to mount the right caliper and found this:

WUDDA PEESA JU... Oh, wait... It's the same one I just bought. But I never press lug studs out or in - I just use a BPH, and a Lisle lug stud installer. https://supermotors.net/getfile/72051/thumbnail/b4.jpg Steve, that's fine, but these are 9/16-18 8 per side. I did pull the first 8 in with a couple of Ace hardware hex nuts and some washers, that and my DeWalt 18V impact made short work of them.

I had an AFB from a Buick 300 V8 that as near as I could tell had a hairline crack in one float bowl, ran good, but would leak gas on the intake overnight.

Ok, first item, a Ford 9" is probably one of the easiest rear ends to set up, it is a removable hog's head (heavy) but once removed is simple to work on. Pinion depth is set after the pinion bearings are installed and pre-loaded, basically once you have the pinion bearings set and the assembly finished, you never remove the bearings again, the pinion carrier is shimmed in or out to get the correct pattern. The ring gear is started in hard contact with the pinion, then one side (the side the pinion is on) the bearing adjusting ring is turned in to set the pre-load, once this is set the backlash is checked, if it is in tolerance, a grease based dye is put on the gears and a pattern is rolled (both directions, drive and coast sides) if the pattern is good, you are done. Any older Ford service manual from 1957 on into the 80s on trucks will have the 9" setup and patterns. I have set up a number of these for myself and friends and much prefer them to the integral carrier style (8.8, 10.25). Ford describes their gear sets as Hunting, Partial non-Hunting and non-Hunting. The description is based on the ring gear tooth count divided by the pinion tooth count, 35/10 = 3.50:1 so each pinion tooth hits the same 35 ring gear teeth, but if you change the pinion to 9 teeth then you get 35/9 = 3.88888888888889 or 3.89:1, this is a Hunting gear set as each pinion tooth ultimately hits ever ring gear tooth. A partial non-hunting set will run most of the teeth meshing at some point, but no all. 39/12 = 3.25 which is probably a partial non-hunting set. Hunting sets as long as they are not damaged can be reused as they do not have to be "timed" non-hunting sets have to be "timed" and new ones will come with painted on match marks. An FYI, Roush-Fenway racing will sell "take-out" 9" rear sets from their race cars at a pretty reasonable price. This will have timing marks if needed and properly set up will probably last a very long time as they are certainly either Ford OEM or the best aftermarket gears available.

Sounds good Jim, mine were bought from the shop that services the bus fleets on tires. I need to (a) repair the broken weld on the center post of my Coats 1010 tire machine and (b) get my Hoffman wheel balancer set up and running. On those tires, December will be 5 years the front ones have been on.

I would say go to a class. Unfortunately the absolute best welding school in the country is an in-house one at Huntington Ingalls Industries - Newport News Shipbuilding. Those welders learn every type of welding including setting up robotic systems. If your local community college offers a good class. go for it.

Jim, I'm pretty lucky here, the county school buses use a 215/85R-16 and as a result I can get them new at a good price. They are heavier rated than Darth but last extremely well. I don't know if they would carry wider ones though. I would look into who the people with school buses buy from, or anyone with a commercial truck. Good luck in your search!

At least you didn't say "inquiring minds".

Jim, it depends on the timing cover casting. If the hole that is behind the upper part of the backing plate and connects to the lifter area is not there, then it should work fairly well. I wouldn't want to chance it with a high heat load through. I was looking to see if I had a diagram of the Pontiac water pump/timing cover but they were discontinued prior to 1982 where my AllData starts. I seem to remember now that it was a single plate and the tubes with seals. The lower hose connects to a cast inlet nipple on the left side of the timing cover right where the left side inlet tube goes and the bypass passage is in the top of that cavity. Without the backing plate the pump impeller just spins the water around with no way of even directing the flow.

I believe you already know the answer to that one.