4.0L Cologne / 5R55 swap

yottabit · Post by **yottabit** » Thu Feb 07, 2008 5:36 pm

Thanks for pointing that out, I'm pretty sure the same 4.0 went into the Rangers after 2001 too. So the motors should definitely be available.

For this swap I'd love to use the donor ECU. You seem to feel strongly against that... so what would you recommend to get it running? I doubt an EEC-IV (aka Ranger 4.0 OHV) would be able to run it... I'd like to avoid megasquirt becuase I'm trying to find a relatively easy swap. In this case I'd rather spend twice as long fussing with wiring than having to tune the whole thing by hand... Who cares if the ECU is throwing a code becuase of lack of certain sensors or such, we don't have a check engine light anyway... I'd just love to get the engine in there and running

As for a tranny I assume it'd be about the same procedure for a T5 swap in a scorpio. Not sure how the shifter would line up, but using a cologne bellhousing on a ford T5 should work just fine I'd assume...

I want to look into the new Tremec T5 for the 4.0 mustangs though... although we've concluded its definitely different... we haven't figured out what it would take to get it working

Post by **DPDISXR4Ti** » Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:54 pm

yottabit wrote:For this swap I'd love to use the donor ECU. You seem to feel strongly against that... so what would you recommend to get it running? I doubt an EEC-IV (aka Ranger 4.0 OHV) would be able to run it... I'd like to avoid megasquirt becuase I'm trying to find a relatively easy swap.

A Ranger OHV EEC-IV PCM *might* work. At a minimum, you'd need to back-date some of the sensors, and possibly the ignition (not sure if they switched over to EDIS prior to '95 on that application). Indeed, I was thinking MegaSquirt or some other stand-alone for engine management. It's not simply a matter of some error codes with EEC-V. Often you've got security systems and all sorts of stuff integrated into the PCM. Perhaps using a base Ranger setup however, you can avoid some of that? Dunno, it's uncharted territory for me, so I can only go by what others have told me.

Talk to Dimitri about EEC-V. I know he was planning to use it on the Scobra project. Also try to track down Noel Williams or Phil Marshall on the 4.0 transplant. I'm not sure if he used a OHC or OHV engine, nor do I know what he did relative to engine management.

yottabit · Post by **yottabit** » Thu Feb 07, 2008 10:40 pm

Alright, thanks for your support !(and sorry for my little rant a few posts ago) I assumed that it shouldn't be that hard to use tricks to fool the EEC-V into working correctly, but you know what assumptions do...

I'll try to get in touch with the people you mentioned. Unfortunately I won't have any time soon to get into the nitty gritty of this research, but when I do I'll be sure to update it here.

But from what I can tell so far, the physical side of things shouldn't be too too much of a problem. At least I know the motor will fit, and we think it should bolt up in a close to stock location. I also think the bellhousing pattern is essentially the same as the 4.0 OHC, or the 2.9 for that matter. This means that tranny options will be sparse, but available...

My dream was to find an engine/tranny combo that would bolt in with minimal modification or fabrication, and then figure out a way (and possibly create a kit) to rig up the donor ECU. This is to maintain factory smoothness and fuel economy. So far, this combo looks like it could fit half of the bill for my goals. I'll work on confirming that, and then get into the ECU side of things.

P.S.: Maybe the next time my friend with his 2002 exploder asks me to help him with his car I should just tell him I found a serious problem and he needs a new engine and ecu and harness??

Also sorry this thread hasn't been filled with many hard facts yet but that will come someday! I want to make sure all the research I do is available for everyone and in plain black and white, not "I think the 4.0 OHC will fit because its the same as the 4.0 OHV and the 4.0 OHV is the same as the 2.9 and John Smith swapped a 2.9 into an XR!!!"

Also I found this doohickey for the EEC-V but it doesn't seem to offer much on the way of disabling things, and I know its far inferior to Megasquirt blah blah http://www.v8power.com/item--SCT-XCalib ... T9400.html

yottabit · Post by **yottabit** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 12:06 am

Hm, supposedly this guy swapped from a 4.0 ohv to a 4.0 sohc in his exploder, keeping the stock EEC-IV with what he called a nice power increase, but no dyno sheet or anything to back it up

http://www.explorerforum.com/forums//sh ... 001&page=4

I'm trying to find if/when the switchover to drive by wire for the ranger was, because a ranger 4.0 sohc/5 speed ecu could be the best EEC-V candidate if the early ones didnt have dbw...

I really need to get sleep instead of getting caught up in this research... lol
What's wrong with me....

yottabit · Post by **yottabit** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 10:01 am

According to the guys at Ranger Power, none of the Rangers have Drive by wire. So it sounds like its just the Mustang that does.

I think the Ranger ECU would be best for swapping to EEC-V, becuase the Ranger came with both the 4.0 SOHC and a 5 speed manual.

Post by **DPDISXR4Ti** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 10:19 am

yottabit wrote:I think the Ranger ECU would be best for swapping to EEC-V, becuase the Ranger came with both the 4.0 SOHC and a 5 speed manual.

If you're running a 5-speed, you could get either PCM and be fine - the calibration differences between a 5-speed and auto are minimal. It's only when you're running an auto that you require the auto PCM for the transmission control. But I suppose given a choice, get the stuff from the 5-speed Ranger.

Still, I'd try to find someone who has successfully gone down this path before you. EEC-V has much more complex logic, and there are probably several sub-routines that get executed under various error conditions. I've heard good things about the SCT software, but I don't know how deeply it lets you reach into the code. I suspect it only allows you to change tables, not the underlying logic.

yottabit · Post by **yottabit** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 10:46 am

I had heard that without an auto tranny the ECU would throw a bunch of error codes, so I just thought it'd be one less thing to worry about.

I'm taking your advice and asking around to see if ANYONE has swapped a EEC-IV vehicle to EEC-V... but really I assume (again

)there aren't that many sensors the EEC-V has that I wouldn't be able to implement (aside from ABS and a few emmissions doohickeys)

I'm trying to get in contact with some SCT people about their Xcalibrater thing but I'm assuming it's pretty limited as far as my needs. It seems from the twEECer website it works with both the EEC-IV 4.0 ohv and EEC-V 4.0 sohc ecus from what I can gather? That could be another option...

But my gut tells me that if I'm going to have to go through the trouble of swapping the wiring harness and ECU ANYWAY to a EEC-IV 4.0 OHV, I might as well go through the extra hassle of setting it up to properly run EEC-V. This is all speculation of course, until I can find out what it'll actually take.

Post by **DPDISXR4Ti** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 10:57 am

yottabit wrote:I'm taking your advice and asking around to see if ANYONE has swapped a EEC-IV vehicle to EEC-V... but really I assume (again )there aren't that many sensors the EEC-V has that I wouldn't be able to implement (aside from ABS and a few emmissions doohickeys)

It's not so much the stuff you can see, touch, and feel - the sensors - that concerns me. Rather, it's the stuff you can't see - the underlying logic - that concerns me. I recall Jim DeBerry had a hellish time with the first 4.6 EEC-V transplant he did - couldn't get the thing to crank at all, I believe due to the integrated security.

yottabit · Post by **yottabit** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 12:17 pm

Sounds like its this "PATS" system your talking about:
http://www.fordscorpio.co.uk/pats.htm

yottabit · Post by **yottabit** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 12:44 pm

Seems like on the EEC-V, the PATS system (along with other things like emissions controls) can be pretty easily eliminated with just a custom chip, or any of the more high end tuning options...

Post by **DPDISXR4Ti** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 1:03 pm

yottabit wrote:Seems like on the EEC-V, the PATS system (along with other things like emissions controls) can be pretty easily eliminated with just a custom chip, or any of the more high end tuning options...

I'll happily be proven wrong if my thoughts on "getting around" the challenges of EEC-V are incorrect. Go git-r-dun!

BeefFajitas · Post by **BeefFajitas** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 1:49 pm

Is the EEC-V OBD-II? If so, I'm sure something like HPTuners or EFILive could be used.

Post by **DPDISXR4Ti** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 1:57 pm

BeefFajitas wrote:Is the EEC-V OBD-II?

Yep. Both kicked in starting in '95 or '96, depending on the application.

yottabit · Post by **yottabit** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 2:08 pm

This should come in handy
http://www.fordpowerproducts.com/FordPo ... 4_2003.pdf

EDIT: Both HPTuner and EFI live are mostly GM based, HPTuner says it can work with the mod motors but not the 4.0 sohc. SCT has a nice race pack tuning package for all the EEC-V ecus though, and I'm sure there are other options there too

Post by **DPDISXR4Ti** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 2:32 pm

yottabit wrote:This should come in handy
http://www.fordpowerproducts.com/FordPo ... 4_2003.pdf

I don't see any issues with fitting that in a XR. The comparable height measurement of a 2.3 with intake, appears to actually be a little taller. The only possible issue to contend with is the oil pan clearance, but I imagine you could use one from a Scorpio (along with the pickup), if that proved to be an issue. Dunno if the pan from the Ranger 2.9 (which is clearly more readily available) is the same as the Scorpio.