The old Ford Ranger remains one of America’s best small pickup trucks. Sure, the newest one is 14 years old now, but these simple, yet insanely capable trucks have proven to be hard workers for generations of truck enthusiasts. But the old Ranger wasn’t perfect. Many of these old trucks are driving around with thrifty, but slow four-cylinder engines. If you speak the gospel of the V8, you’ll note that no factory-built Ranger has such an engine. Some folks have found ways to breathe new life into an old Ranger by hopping it up with V8 power, and you can do it, too.
The Ford Ranger of the 1980s to the 2000s helped lead a small truck revolution in the United States. The small trucks from decades prior were often rebadged Japanese imports or coupé utilities like the Ford Ranchero. If you wanted something that looked like and worked like a full-size truck but was scaled down in size, you were largely out of luck.
The 1983 Ford Ranger replaced the trusty, rebadged Mazda truck known as the Courier. There was nothing egregiously wrong with the Courier, but American buyers demanded more. They wanted a small truck with the styling, cab space, and payload a bit closer to a big truck, but with the fuel economy of something closer to a car. The Ranger, alongside its Chevrolet S-10 and Dodge Dakota domestic competition, had Americans falling in love. All of these trucks offered significant capability and quality, and also frugality that didn’t drain the wallet.
Despite the home-run success of the Ranger, its mission did give the truck a couple of potential blind spots. Buyers were able to get a Ranger with great fuel economy or modest power. There were no options for power and fuel economy. Likewise, the Ranger also lacked a truly hot muscle truck engine option.
A Great Truck, But Lots Were Saddled With Slow Fours
At launch, the 1983 Ranger’s frugal gas engine was a 2.0-liter Pinto four (the more famous Pinto motor was the 2.3, which was also available) that made a whopping 73 HP, but got over 20 mpg. Meanwhile, the hottest engine, found at the tail end of the first-gen’s run, was a 4.0-liter Cologne V6 that made 160 HP in its best configuration, but only 19 mpg on the highway. Meanwhile, the absolute best for fuel economy was the 86 HP 2.3-liter Mitsubishi inline-four diesel, which Ford claimed got as high as 41 mpg.
No matter which Ranger you chose, you weren’t getting a particularly spicy truck. The 4.0 V6 got the truck to 60 in as fast as about nine or 10 seconds, which is twice as fast as the diesel, and not bad for the time, but not really fast by modern standards.
This continued in the second-generation Ranger, which launched in the 1993 model year, and the third-generation, which ran from 1997 to 2011 (2012 in Mexico). The original Ranger series bowed out with its hottest engine being the Cologne SOHC V6, which made a respectable 207 HP and 238 lb-ft of torque. Yet, even with a bit more ponies in the stable, these stock trucks still took 10 seconds to hit 60 mph.
[Ed Note: With the 4.0-liter V6, later Rangers were decently quick for the time, and the rare SLP Thunderbolt version did 0-60 in the sixes! But yeah, most Rangers were 10-second 0-60 trucks, at best. -DT].
Most Ranger owners don’t seem to care. I’ve had the pleasure of owning a 1997 Ranger with the 2.3-liter four and a 2000 Ranger with the 4.0-liter V6. The ’97 was a snail, but it got 30 mpg. The ’00 got 16 mpg on a good day and was still mostly a snail, but was unstoppable off-road.
Some Ranger owners have found themselves wanting more. Those wanting power and fuel economy sometimes swap out their engines with Volkswagen turbodiesel engines. Then there’s the folks who want to make the hot rod small V8 pickup that Ford itself didn’t make back then.
I was reminded of the Ranger V8 swap phenomenon by news last week that Australian tuner Killa Conversions & Performance has outfitted a Ranger Raptor with a supercharged Coyote V8 pumping out 750 HP. The truck is the stuff of dreams, but not only is the swap currently stuck in the Land Down Under, but it also costs a whopping $57,000 USD on top of the price of the truck. Thankfully, America has already figured this out for a lot less scratch.
Keeping It In The Family
If you’re looking to spice up an old third-generation Ranger, one of the best ways to achieve that would be to look at an Explorer. The second-generation Explorer, sold in model years 1995 to 2003, shares a lot of componentry and compatibility with the Ranger. They aren’t the same vehicles underneath, but so many Explorer components transfer over to the Ranger.
What’s pretty sweet about the second-generation Explorer is that from 1996 to 2001, you were able to find them with a 5.0-liter OHV 16-valve V8 good for 215 HP and 288 lb-ft of torque. While this engine isn’t super hot, what’s great about it is that, as Ford Ranger enthusiast resource the Ranger Station writes, it’s about as close to a plug-and-play swap as you’ll find. From the Ranger Station:
Using the Explorer 5.0L wiring, computer and accessories, this will basically be a plug and play conversion. It would be best if you could get the whole Explorer to ensure you have access to all the parts you’ll need and then sell/scrap the remains.
You will likely have to deal with the PATS during your conversion. If you swap in the [Passive Anti Theft System] from the Explorer, you’ll be set. If you use your existing PATS (keys, etc) you’ll have to tow your Ranger to a Ford dealer to re-program PATS to synch [Electronic Engine Control], PATS module, and keys. The two biggest problems you could run in to doing this swap would be the PATS and [Vehicle Speed Sensor.]
We can’t stress enough the importance of having the [Electrical and Vacuum Troubleshooting Manual] for both the year of the Ranger you’re working on and the year of the Explorer engine you’re installing. You’ll need it to figure out the VSS and PATS.
The Ranger Station then explains why the Explorer is such a great donor vehicle:
The easiest V8 donor for a 1998-2007 Ranger 4×4 swap would be the 1996-2001 Explorer/Mountaineer 5.0 AWD. The Explorer 5.0L has been called a GT-40 because the 1996-1997.5 Explorer 5.0L used Ford’s GT-40 cylinder heads. The 1997.5-2001 Explorer 5.0Ls were GT-40p’s. It’s easy to tell the difference between cylinder heads while they are on the motor because GT-40s will have a big ‘GT’ embossed on the side, and GT-40Ps will have a big ‘GTP’.
The Explorer 5.0L is mostly a plug-and-play conversion. All things considered, the 1998-2000 Rangers are the easiest year range for an Explorer 5.0L swap, with 1999-2000 4×4 V6s being the easiest within that group. You want a 1996-1997 Explorer 5.0L for a 1998 and older Ranger (neither has a PATS) and a 1998-2001 Explorer 5.0L for 1999 and newer Ranger. If you put a 1998-2001 Explorer 5.0L into a 1998 or older Ranger, you’ll have to add a PATS along with the Explorer steering column. If you put a 1996-1997 Explorer 5.0L engine into a 1998 Ranger ,you’ll have to adjust for the fuel system differences noted below under Fuel System
The entire 5.0 engine, transmission, and AWD transfer case from the Explorer bolts directly into a 1998+ 4×4 Ranger using the Ranger mounting points and original driveshafts. The problem is that the single-speed AWD case does not have a low range for off-road use. There is also a reduction in acceleration, fuel economy, and tire life on the street with the full-time AWD case. There are options below for adding a manual transfer case.
The guide then goes through the process in pretty decent detail, noting that the engine mounts from the Explorer bolt right up into the engine bay of your Ranger. You don’t even need to supply a transmission as the 4R70W four-speed auto from the Explorer also bolts right up. You can keep your Ranger’s stock two-speed transfer case using a readily available aftermarket adaptor plate.
The guide then continues with how you can use the fuel system, radiator, exhaust down pipes, and, depending on the year of your Ranger, even the speedometer and anti-theft system from the donor Explorer. The hardest part of the swap appears to be the speedometer and the anti-theft system, especially if you’re swapping a 2001 and newer Ranger model, as now you’re futzing around with modifications and maybe even taking your truck to a dealership to have modules paired.
The guide at the Ranger Station isn’t perfect, but it’s good enough that I bet even I could do a swap like this, and I’m normally a person who wouldn’t even consider an engine swap in anything bigger than a scooter. The great thing is that the Ranger Station community is pretty tight-knit, so there are threads detailing parts of the swap that might not have been covered in the original guide.
It seems the basic, most common suggestion in the community is that you should grab an Explorer that runs and drives fine, then snatch all of the parts you need out of that vehicle.
Of course, the benefit of doing a V8 swap varies. If you have one of the newer 4.0 V6s, then a stock 5.0 V8 isn’t really giving you much more power. The biggest benefit comes from dropping a V8 into a truck that used to have a four-cylinder. Though the Ranger Station warns that a swap will usually take 50 to 70 hours and potentially thousands of dollars. At some point, buying a V6 Ranger would be the better practical option, but many Ranger owners do the swaps just for the fun of it and to hear the lovely roar of a V8.
Of course, some folks have tuned their V8s for more power, and others have swapped in manual transmissions, too. Technically, your limit is really just with your imagination, budget, and skill. Check out this Explorer-swapped Ranger:
While the Explorer 5.0-liter V8 swap is the most common Ranger V8 swap by a country mile, there are other options out there. Some people with first-generation Ford Rangers have lowered carbureted 302 cubic inch V8s into their engine bays. Another option for first-gen and second-gen Rangers is the Ford 351 Windsor.
The Windsor is a promising unit because stock outputs got as hot as 240 HP and 340 lb-ft of torque in the original Ford F-150 SVT Lightning. That engine in a Ranger would be bonkers, especially considering that the Lightning was already pretty quick! However, Ranger enthusiasts warn that there’s a lot more work involved in a 351 Windsor swap. The engine is slightly larger, giving you less room in the engine bay to work, and overall, it’s not nearly as easy as the Explorer 5.0 swap.
One guide for swapping in something like a 351 talks about using engine mounts from the mid-1980s Ford Mustang Convertible. It also mentions that you might have to do some cutting to make parts fit. Here’s the engine fitment part of the guide:
Now it’s time to situate the motor into the chassis. We’re assuming your transmission is already installed. There are several points during engine installation where clearance will be rather tight and modifications will be necessary. If the engine isn’t bolted to the transmission, bolt it up now. Assuming the transmission is located properly, let it locate the motor, forward to rear, in the chassis. Now, locate the engine properly, left and right. At this point, no accessories should be on the front of the motor, and installation will be easier without the water pump attached. Leaving the water pump off while installing the engine will allow it to go in more smoothly and may save several dents in the radiator support. Don’t install the radiator yet, or you’ll be sending it out to have several holes repaired.
The motor should be close to centered, left to right, between the frame rails. It may be necessary to locate the motor slightly to the passenger side for the oil filter adapter to the steering sector clearance, and the steering to exhaust manifold clearance. If you bought a conversion kit with motor mounts, it probably has measurements to tell you where to mount the engine mounts to the crossmember.
Here’s what happens if your donor 302 V8 or Windsor V8 engine has EFI, as would be the case if you got your Windsor out of an old Lightning:
If you choose to use a fuel injected 5.0L you’ll need the computer and harness for the engine. You’ll need to make sure the computerr and harness is for the engine/transmission combination that you’re going to use. If you use a manual transmission then you’ll need to use a computer and harness from a manual transmission set up. The best thing you could do is go to a salvage yard and get an engine transmission combination and buy the whole setup – computer, harness and all. Mark the connections with masking tape with either letters or numbers so that you can match up the connections later. It also helps to go to a parts store and get the Haynes manual for the vehicle the engine came out of. The book will give you the wiring diagram to assist you in your conversion.
Comments on forums talk a lot about clearance issues, including the intake against the hood of the truck and the engine accessories against the radiator. In other words, a 351 swap is definitely harder, which is why the 5.0-liter Explorer swap is much more popular. That said, someone did manage to fit a 460 big block in their Ranger, which is awesome:
Something else that’s really cool is that Ford did make a supercharged 5.4-liter V8-powered Ranger, but sadly, that never left the concept stage:
If you’re not married to V8s, some people have modernized their Rangers by swapping in 2.0-liter Ecoboost and 2.3-liter Ecoboost engines. A Ranger with one of these can easily produce over 300 HP and over 300 lb-ft of torque. That’s insane for a truck that, at its hottest from the factory, was 100 HP short of that. Sure enough, there’s even a neat little guide for that, too.
Depending on the path that you choose, you could easily build a super Ford Ranger for under $10,000. People are putting all kinds of engines in these things, from Cummins 4BTs and Volkswagen TDIs to huge big block V8s, BMW straight-sixes, and even electric conversions.
What I love most about this is that people are finding new ways to keep these trucks exciting. The oldest Rangers are now over 40 years old, yet people are still having fun using them for work and off-roading. The mind-boggling number of swaps out there is perhaps just more examples of why the old Ford Ranger remains an Internet legend. So, go ahead, make that V8 Ranger that Ford was never willing to sell you (just listen to that V8 burble above!) or make the perfect tiny diesel truck. The Ranger will do that and more because Rangers remain eternal.
If you have the 2.3 four cylinder in the newer trucks, it’s a bolt on swap for the turbo manifolds and turbo from the Thunderbird Turbo Coupe. If you keep boost pressures low it’s essentially an afternoon project to turbo charge the Ranger with minimal supporting mods needed. A colleague in college did this, it helped his fuel mileage overall (when not rodding on it at least) and made it way more entertaining to drive.
Of course, the newest Ranger is 14 years old, and the Turbo Coupe is 37 years old, so finding the parts may be a bit harder…
NOW it’s a popular swap? What about 20 years ago, when it was actually happening?
Genuises? You guys really need to branch out with these titles.
My uncle has had a 302 swapped Ranger sitting in the shop that he crashed immediately after the swap. I’ve never seen it run because that happened before I was born… in the early 90’s.
There’s a guy on YT that put a harbor freight small engine in his Ranger… Mad bonkers.
Literally this has been known since the first v8 explorers hit the road. In the show scene I seen rangers with explorer V8s the first year they came out.
As someone who was 6’5″ by the late 80s, I can tell you the Americans did not flock to American small trucks for more cab room. I could ride or drive in Mazda, Isuzu, Toyota and Nissan single cabs just fine (Mitsubishi and Dodge D50s, too.) In fact I had a Mazda B2200 and an Isuzu P’up single cab during this time. Rangers and S-10s were a chore to ride in due to lack of room, much less drive.
It was only the emergence of the extended cab that made domestics roomier and allowed me to slide the seat back to a comfortable driving position.
Incidentally, I had a single cab 88 F-250 4×4 for a time as well. I thought it had plenty of room, but it turns out only for the driver. I had to make a long trip to pick up my 69 Mustang from a relative, and brought someone along with me to help load and drive. I finally rode in the passenger seat of my truck, and the leg room was compromised due to the floorboard being pushed up for the transfer case. I had ridden in a 2wd version of the truck before and don’t remember that problem.
Learned to drive stick in a 1988 single-cab Ranger. I’m 6’3″, and every time I’d let off the clutch my knee would signal a right turn.
I chose the 3.0L Ranger and really wish I would have gone 4.0 or 2.3. It barely made more power than the 2.3 and only returned 22 mpg.
The benefit isn’t so much just the stock V8 power, but the insane aftermarket support for the 5.0 engine. Want a lumpy cam? Easy. A supercharger? Done. Want a single turbo? Done. Twin turbo? Done. Power-wise, you are only limited by money. And traction.
A Thunderbird Turbo or SVO would be a direct swap and can easily be tuned to get you over 300 whp.
There’s reasons Ford didn’t put a V8, even the 5 liter, in a Ranger- Weight & MPG! A 4×4 Ranger’s front end is pushing overloaded with 60% of it’s weight on the front axle, Explorer can get away with the V8’s weight because it has a bunch more steel over the rear axle to act as a counterweight. This was the age of CAFE too, and Ford probably didn’t care to lose money on even more less than $10K 4 banger Rangers to counterbalance 15 MPG V8s. That said, the 5 liter V8 is great but a 4 cylinder Ecobeast swap would deliver MPG and more power!
This seems like so much work and expense. For decades I read 4×4 magazines and nearly every month in nearly every mag some reader wrote in on how to get more power from a 4cyl wrangler and the answer was always sell it and buy a 6cyl wrangler.
If you have Ranger in good shape and it has a 4cyl. just love it as it is and spend the money on something else faster.
Also I hated my 88 ranger with the 2.8 (or 2.9) v6 that would vapor locked if there was any ethanol in the gas and it was above 70oF.
A V8 Danger Ranger would be sweet!
Will that 40mpg diesel bolt up to a 2011 ranger? It would be cool to combine the efficient motor with modern safety equipment such as side airbags.
I gotta wonder how long ago that guide was written. It’s not so easy to find 302s around anymore. The last new one was built 24 years ago, and lots of Explorers disappeared due to Cash for Clunkers (one of the few times where this is true and C4C isn’t just a scapegoat).
A few years ago I was shopping for a 347 stroker for my car, and at the time there were a couple of well known engine builders who stocked and sold stroker short and long blocks based on a factory 302 block. By the time I was actually ready to buy, I found out both companies no longer sold them because it was getting too hard for them to find rebuildable cores. So I could buy a stroker based on an aftermarket block ($3K min just for the block) or have them build my engine. In a stroke of luck and parts bartering I actually found a brand new never used 302 roller block locally so I had that built up for me.
If I was doing the same thing today I’d serious consider spending the money on a Coyote swap instead.
That guide on Ranger Station is old, as it was up when I was considering doing a V8 swap on my ’93 Ranger in 2002. It’s been updated a bit since then, but like you note (and I noted in another comment), it assumes there are still V8 Explorers out in the wild which simply isn’t the case anymore.
Also, the Coyote V8 doesn’t fit inside the Ranger/Explorer engine bay. A few folks have made it work, but it involved a lot of cutting and custom front suspension to give it clearance.
I have kept my ’92 Ranger around with the hopes of doing this someday. However, the mice have eaten the interior and the windshield started leaking, filling the inside with water. It is most likely destined for a scrap yard.
Minor edit on the available V6s, Mercedes. At launch in 1983 the available V6 was a 2.8L Cologne, bumped up to 2.9L in 1986. In 1990 the 3.0L Vulcan was added as was the 4.0L Cologne. From 1990-1992 you could get a 2.9L Cologne, 3.0L Vulcan, or 4.0L Cologne. In 1993 the 2.9L was dropped, and in 2001 the 4.0L was converted to the SOHC Cologne.
Sorry about that, I had an incomplete thought when I wrote that sentence. I meant the hottest V6 for the first generation. It should be fixed now!
Us Ranger pedants are a testy bunch!
Honestly, I wish they had put 5.0’s in Rangers from the factory.
Because the 5.0 powertrain was by far the most reliable powertrain they put in 2nd gen Explorers.
2.3 Rangers were ok, but no power, and some would have head/piston cracking issues.
3.0 Rangers were decently reliable, but weak and sometimes broken valve springs.
4.0 OHV’s were durable, but a fair amount of them would crack heads.
4.0 SOHC’s were powerful, but that stupid fucking chain design was a disaster.
But 5.0 Explorers? Damn things would go over 200k miles even with poor maintenance, they had a different (stronger/simpler) 4 speed transmission, and they had a durable viscous coupler AWD case that was also great (even if no low range).
I suspect there was never a V-8 Ranger because Ford wouldn’t want it cutting into F100/150 sales.
Yeah, probably.
It’s worth noting that the PATS issue is pretty easily resolved with the use of FORScan with the extended license.
Also, as much as I enjoy the V8 Ranger swap, the V8 swap into the first gen Sport Trac is the real genius move. Those only came with the SOHC 4.0L, which is a fine engine aside from the idiotic timing chain setup, but the V8 is also a bolt-in affair for those times when the timing chains give up and grenade the 4.0L.
I was going to V8 swap my second gen Explorer Sport (the 2-door model) last winter, but finding a V8 donor Explorer is getting real hard these days. I found one that would have worked, but the 5.0L had 320,000 miles on it, so I gave up on the idea when I factored in the cost of parts to rebuild the engine (plus the opportunity cost of my labor to rebuild it versus doing other things like figuring out how to solid axle swap the front end). Ultimately, I gave up on the idea and sold the Explorer and bought a Jeep TJ that I plan to LS swap after I get done swapping in new axles.
I really liked the Sport Trac, we had a V6 2nd gen but it started having all kinds of issues, master cylinder, steering rack. But you could get the adrenalin package and a V8 in the 2nd gen, nice little hot factory truck.
I’ve had a few first gen Sport Tracs, including an Adrenalin (when it was just some chrome wheels and a better stereo). I always wanted a V8 second gen, but when they were new I couldn’t afford one and now that I can afford one they are nearly impossible to find in good shape. Womp womp.