I'm sorry if this is an old idea that's been done many times before, but I can't find any information on it. I might be having trouble with my search do to not knowing the proper terminology of what I have in mind. I really have searched extensively to no success and finally decided to register here and ask figuring this site is my best bet to find these answers.

I want to do something in way of forced induction on a 2.3 lima for my first gen Ranger. The stock n/a power output is rather low even if extensive modification is done. I've read of people managing to get decent performance staying n/a, but at the cost of no longer being practical for daily street use. I drive my truck all over the west coast following my job and I want to avoid the ridiculous cam, solid lifters and such on road trips. I decided to stay with the 2.3 for a few reasons; turbo'd applications do well, lightest of the reasonable engine swap options and mostly I'm cheap. I have a fair amount of time and energy (and money) in the suspension trying to make the economy pick up originally designed to haul small appliances handle like anything other than what it is. After lowering it (with legit engineered drop arms) and stiffening it up with a tighter spring rate. 4x4 sway bars, dampener, 8.8 disk brake rear end and polyurethane bushings I was able to get the handling on par with a late 90s minivan and the ride quality similar to a pallet on casters. Still much better than the original dynamics, but I'd hate to lose what steering response I now have by adding more weight with a larger engine.

To gain boost I want to go with something a bit more creative than finding a donor TurboCoupe/Whatever. The reasoning for this decision is strictly the price and availability of parts that are becoming harder to find. My idea is to leave engine dynamics between stock turbo and stock N/A specs. Of course I plan to upgrade to better internal hardware like connecting rod bolts and head studs with forged pistons, but leaving the compression ratio closer to the N/A application. I want to assemble it completely as a stock N/A EFI setup ECU and all. I want to run the exhaust to the first/feeding turbo that would feed a smaller turbo placed nearest to the intake that would have a simple draw through carb. Between the two turbos would sit what I can only describe as a reverse blow off valve or perhaps a some type of externally operated valve to limit unwanted spooling of the second/charging turbo to either engage at a set engine load or at the operators discretion. Between the charge turbo and intake would be a reed valve that prevents normal vacuum pressure from drawing in air/fuel from the draw through during normal low load running and would have a alternative air inlet for running on just the N/A EFI.

I understand there wouldn't be much control with tuning the two independent fuel systems. Although I believe running the carb on a slightly leaner mixture would have it running somewhat effectively. Only when using the draw through carb the EFI would still continue to add fuel to the specifications of its perimeters. The issue with adding boost to a stock fuel management system is the resulting leaning of fuel from air intake exceeding the typical volume in which it is calibrated, so would adding fuel through a separate supply essentially correct that problem, fix world hunger and reverse climate change? (The last two hypothesized results tho optimistic are wildly speculative and merit no response.)

 

Also I forgot to add I'm not too worried with specifics pertaining to this exact engine or even ford. I'm curious about this setup working or failing with any similar concept. I'm without preference of manufacture or particular injection platform. I'm wondering if multi-port, TBI or perhaps if different peripherals such as with or without a MAPP sensor make a difference too.

 

What year Ranger is this? What trans?how much power do you wanna make? Megasquirt might be a good option for you. You’ll need a map with that system

 

It has the t-k 5 out of the same year (87)ranger, but used with a 2.9 engine. I've read elsewhere that the strength of TKs internals were dependent to the size of engine it was assembled with. So I've convinced myself on it being invincible and I'm pretty happy with that delusion. I'll look into Megasquirt, but I don't believe 2.3 gained a mapp until they abandoned the dizzy for a duel plug head powered from coil packs. I'm more interested at this point in seeing what success a system like this is capable of. Essentially I feel like this is the boost equivalent to the Wet kit of nitros. Since it adds the fuel needed for combustion and is just extra power letting the original system operate as if nothing is changed. I would only want this setup to operate under excessive load surpassing the EFIs ability. To be honest it would be getting used more than I make it seem, I doubt I could drive it even once without using both feet to hold the throttle on the floor.

 

Is this vehicle going to be required to pass emissions?

I think you would have less time, money, effort and headache in it to go to a standalone EFI and large injectors. You will have complete control of all the functions required to properly tune the turbo and it will just run better in general.

How do you intend to stop the carburetor from working all the time?

 

Some sort of a reed type flap that remains shut when the turbo isn't spooling. I have planed a small box (3-4" sq) attached right in front of the throttle body. On the side straight across from the throttle would be where the charged air enters on top would be a another opening to a filter. Inside the box would be a flap that would rest closing off the turbo inlet and once charged it would push out of the way blocking off the top inlet. I already have the parts to build this laying around. Its only going to be two turbos, some plumbing and the carb. I guess it'll take some of my rather poor fabrication that will require extensive grinding, painting and ultimately redone by a certain friend of mine who through either disgust or pity has fixed my shotty jobs more than once.

Living in AZ I don't have to worry about emissions. The answer to your question I missed earlier I would only expect 150 hp at the highest. To be honest I think 120 is probably still more than I'll have a chance at. If I am able to reach 100 or 110 I would be satisfied, but 150 just sounds much better. This is more than likely going to be a absolute failure that will result in complete removal and more than likely deactivating this account as to disassociate myself from the embarrassment I plan to build. Before doing any work on the engine internals I plan to attempt a proof of concept. I want to know it will at least blow more wet air than the vacuum pulls alone.

 

Maybe you can get an 87 turbocoupe engine , harness and ecm and exceed your hp requirements in stock form

 

I've been looking around for a turbocoupe and haven't had much luck. Anything I find is out of my intended budget. Cheep is my goal here, but I've got wiggle room. I get paid way more than my bills and habits cost, but I don't feel like spending over a 1000 at this time and I'd only do that much if it was a full running coupe swap. The part that burns me is a few years ago I picked up a running driving complete donor TC that was smashed in the rear for only $500 and that price included a complete 96ish supercoupe (no title) that needed engine work. These cars had everything on them still, but I ended up letting them go for the same price I paid to make room thinking I would never need them.

 

Thanks for the replies so far, I appreciate the suggestions.

 

MMM, you are way overthinking this. Start with a simple turbo system, and your chance of success is 10X. If your truck has EFI, you can go bigger injectors, and control it with a Megasquirt. I don't think you can do it for under $1000, however. The other route is cheaper, and a little easier to put together. A drawthrough system consists of a single turbocharger, some ductwork, a turbo to carb manifold, and a smallish Holley or other carb with vacuum secondaries. The turbo must have a carbon seal between the compressor and the center section. There are a lot of T3 turbos out there that had this seal. And it just so happens, the T3 is the right size for your engine. Also, it is imperative that the entire intake track be downhill or at the least, parallel, from carb to intake valve. Do you have enough hood clearance to pull that off? If your interested, ask me for more details.
By the way, a turbo that is not under a load, is basicly a naturally aspirated engine. You don't need any weird flaps or valves. You can control that by the size of the turbine housing.

 

Do you have another vehicle to drive? I would do this if you only have the truck

 

I actually looked into this with a 2.3 car I've got sitting around, and I placed an emphasis on cheap.

You're absolutely right, the turbocoupe parts are really hard to come by. And your current ECM doesn't play nice with boost, nor is it supported with any real tuning software.

If you're really pinching pennies here, buy a set of 2.3T pistons. Stock replacements are way cheaper than aftermarket ones and will hold up to 300+hp. You might want/need to grind the combustion chambers to be closer to the turbo heads. Porting the intake is cheap and easy. Throw on a turbo manifold and turbo of your choice, there's tons of cheap aftermarket options out there.

Now for the hard part. How do you control it? You can buy a refurbished turbocoupe ECM pretty cheap. Other 2.3T ECMs are options, but the auto TC ones are the cheapest and most plentiful I've found. You will have to repin and add a couple connectors to your stock 2.3 harness, but not a big deal. Then you just get the corresponding vane air meter (VAM) to the ECM you bought and you're ready to rock up to the 20+ psi range. If you buy the tuning software in the future you can switch to a MAF of your choice.

 

Holy crap. No emissions? 5.0L swap it and don't look back. Stop making it so hard.

I had a lowered '84, hot-rodded 2.0L rev-monster, 4 speed, then did a T5 swap after the 4 speed broke, then did a carb'd SBF/T5 swap. Fun truck, but was a tough build because it was pre-internet and info was HARD to come by.

It was replaced with a lowered '86 2.9L automatic (A4LD) that I later converted to mass air and turbo'd with a Garrett T-3 from a Chrysler 2.2L. It was a total blast and ran great until a stuck boost controller killed a couple of pistons. This was my first turbo project and I barely knew what I was doing, but it worked.

Swapped in a warmed over '86 5.0L in it with a T5 and drove it like that for several years. It was a junkyard motor, with new bearings, used HO forged pistons, new rings, a used HO roller cam and Explorer exhaust manifolds. Read: Cheap. An 88 F-150 EEC-IV speed density ecu was dang near plug and play.

The turbo version was fun, but the EFI 5.0L was hands-down a better all around bang for my buck and reliable combo.

 

I agree with BBR a 5.0 is a easy swap I did it on my 85 bronco II which is essentially a Ranger.I stuck with a carb since that’s what it had to begin with
It was a 600cfm 4bbl on a weiand dual plane intake a rv cam and long tube headers.never got to turbo it. Throw a mustang T5 behind the 5.0 and there you go. Explorers are another good source for a 5.0 they are EFI and have DIS ignition already plus better heads than the foxbody cars had

 

Not a ranger, but a 2.3L, https://www.theturboforums.com/threads/93-mustang-coupe-2-3l-to-turbo.384724/

Ebay has a 2.3 turbo header for 199. Is your 87 a 4 plug or 8 plug engine?
A PIMP XS uses a MAP sensor to reference manifold vac and pressure for speed density.
Bottom line, what you are proposing would not function as you want it to. Fueling would be shooting in the dark, not to mention how would you pull timing to compensate for boost pressure and inhibit detonation?

 

Thanks for all the replies, I appreciate your help. However, I just gave up and ended up doing a 4.0 swap. I'm going to keep looking until I find a donor turbocoupe before I attempt boost. Then again I might just stick with the v6.

 

Which 4.0? Ohv or sohc? IMO when you compare either of the 4.0 engines to a 5.0 the 5.0 is the clear winner. When the horsepower bug starts biting again it’s easier to find 5.0 parts and you’ll get more gain too. So economically it’s clearly the better choice. It’s your truck
And you build it how you like . I can advise you anyway good luck and post a lot of pics of your build.