If you are encountering login problems please check here

95+ rocker arm swap?
#1

I was searching for ranger roller cam specs and ran across an article that discussed the differences between the 89-94 roller cam and the 95+ setup. Apparently the valve lift is the same on both cams but the 95+ cam has less lobe lift and uses higher ratio rockers to make up for it. Thus if you use the early roller cam with the late roller rockers you end up with something like 0.450" lift while maintaining the small duration numbers that make the ranger roller such a great cam for a street turbo setup.

Of course the late rockers are set up for the smaller 7mm valve stem so they need to be opened up a little for the early valve stem diameter. I'm dropping my head off at the machine shop soon so this is my opportunity to find a set of late rockers and have them opened up.

Anyone heard of this swap or can verify the numbers presented at this link?

http://www.route66hotrodhigh.com/2300Cams.html
Old:
1990 Ranger 2.3T swap

New:
2001 Ranger 2.3T swap, ported dp head, 42s, fmic, etc. EEC-V tuned with SCT
Reply
#2

total BS- and internet lore. the ratios are the same.
1987 Ranger 4x4 SB standard cab with Megasquirt
Reply
#3

I think a lot of the info one that site is wrong
Reply
#4

DITTO! :dunno:
Placerville, California
(former)  2.3T '78 Courier ~ (current)  2.3T '87 Ranger & '82 Mazda B2200 (smog-exempt diseasel truck)
Reply
#5

OK thanks guys! I figured if it was really that simple everybody would be doing it.
Old:
1990 Ranger 2.3T swap

New:
2001 Ranger 2.3T swap, ported dp head, 42s, fmic, etc. EEC-V tuned with SCT
Reply
#6

Man that website needs to get taken down! I can't count the number of threads I've seen with a link to that site.
88 TC in Canyon Red
Walbro 255, AEM wideband, CP Pistons, FMIC, PIMP, SVO T3, Ranger roller, 3" Stinger exhaust, AFPR, RFL BOV, Gutted upper, Ported lower
Reply
#7

I agree. Fits well in the "new" world of "alternate facts" though I guess.
|STINGER PERFORMANCE| 2.3T Parts, Swap & Tech Articles |FAQ| -FORUM-|
|->PiMPxs & PiMPx ECU\'s<-| SVOx3, Turbo 06 GT
Reply
#8

^^ :lol: :lol: :lol: ^^
Good one Shannon. :dunno: </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">

...and I verified it in my shop. Wink
(2) 84.5 TurboGT 'verts/84.5 TurboGT hatch/(3) 86 SVOs
86 LX 2.3 (project Ratstang)/04 SVT Focus #1276
77 F-350/40 Ford Sedan/67 Fairlane GT
Reply
#9

After more research it appears that the whole internet rumor got started with a typo in the Ford service manual for the 1995 Ranger where the ratio for the then-new stamped-style roller rocker was defined as being 1.86:1 instead of the correct 1.64:1

Amazing how much confusion one little typo in an obscure service manual could cause!
Old:
1990 Ranger 2.3T swap

New:
2001 Ranger 2.3T swap, ported dp head, 42s, fmic, etc. EEC-V tuned with SCT
Reply
#10

It just doesn't pass the common sense test for me. The lash adjuster, valve, and cam tower are fixed positions. If you're setting the geometry so the cam hits the roller and not the body of the follower, you don't have that much room to play with.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)