All Small Six A 200 in a bronco 2

[Mightyfordranger]

So I had an idea of swapping in a 200 in place of the factory 2.9l v6 which makes iirc 145hp when new. Reasons are to simplify the engine bay and gain more reliability. not to mention the larger aftermarket support so more power perhaps as well.

I wonder what the trans options I have a good AOD small block Ford trans.
And I really need to know what the overall length of a 200 is and it's height. I know width it'll fit by nature it's skinnier than a v6.

 

[Broncitis]

2 or 4 wheel drive, my opinion these vehicles aren't worth waisting time and money over, not a good investment or platform to stray away from stock and put money in, way to many better vehicles to invest time and money in. This will be my final post on this, you do what is best for you.

 

[aussie7mains]

So I had an idea of swapping in a 200 in place of the factory 2.9l v6 which makes iirc 145hp when new. Reasons are to simplify the engine bay and gain more reliability. not to mention the larger aftermarket support so more power perhaps as well.

I wonder what the trans options I have a good AOD small block Ford trans.
And I really need to know what the overall length of a 200 is and it's height. I know width it'll fit by nature it's skinnier than a v6.

You wont get 145bhp out of the 200 six, keep the v6, or get a bigger v6.

 

[B RON CO]

Hi, the 200 and 250 engines are @ 30" long. All 250s have the small block bell housing bolt pattern. Only the few low mount starter 200s have the small block bolt pattern. An easier swap would be a 302. James Duff has motor mounts and other parts to facilitate the V8 swap. Good luck

 

[xctasy]

The Cologne V6 shares the 138 teeth flexplate small C4 "non luck- up C5" truck gearbox. The 200 high mount from 1978- 1983 shares the same flexplate teeth count.

The Fox 200dual hump sump fits the Bronco II and Explorer out board steering box or later rack.

So fitting a 200 is easy.

The whole 83- 2010 Ranger Bronco II/ Explorer front body structure, although a separate chassis SUV and an elective all wheel drive design, is specificaly based on the Australian TE/TF and German Taurus TE/TF front structure "hard" points, with the HVAC unit in the engine bay, not in the cabin like the 78- 2003 Fox chassis Mustang derivatives and 70-80 Pinto/ 74-78 Mustang II.

The front radiator can be shifted outboard like the six cylinder TRI 5 Chevy's...One of our old FSP users put a 300 in his SWB Bronco II.

On the Serious Explorers, I am Log EFi.

The little short deck 200 is way lower at 7.803 inches, than the 8.465 inch tall 221, or 9.38 or 9.469 inch tall block deck 250 Ford sixes from Australian or US Ford's.

And, click bait, anyone who has the mearest 'smidgen' of understanding about what Crosley and Paul Knott did with the 200 and 170 engines, making 205 HP and 280 HP net respectively from standard head but modified two log head engines, know's the log head engine is easily able to go way,way over 145 HP net the 2.9 EFi did in the Bronco II.

Even stock Alloy head II New Zealand market 3.3 liter Falcons made 126 HP with a 2bbl carb in 1982.


The only reasons for the stock 125 HP gross to 85-94 HP net for the iron log head 3.3 liter engines was cam timing and compression ratio to avoid knock on regular gas. Just a cam change and bump up on compression in the bigger 1 bbl Carb log heads can have those engines making 145 HP before even touching the Carb and cylinder Head porting and Exhaust system.


Good fortune on scoping out this project. Its a No Brainer.

A lot of the Ranger and Bronco II DNA is similar to the 66 to 77 Early Bronco.

 

[Mightyfordranger]

I was after an inline 6 because it's simple to maintain. I don't need big power 200-220hp and like 250tq would be fine. Probably never turn a tire bigger than a 33 with proper gearing or more realistic a 31 which is what's on it now.

But anyway I already have a 302, it needs rebuilt. I'd really love a 300 but that's a real task to wedge it in there.

Another option which you guys might boo and rightfully so is a Mopar slant 6. An undersquare engine with an immediate torque curve is really what I'm after a nice truck engine. 145hp is fine just need a nice tq number.

The purpose of this bronco setup would be for general purpose. Light towing haul the family in poor weather conditions (it's 4wd btw) and light recovery work buddy slipped in a ditch in a field or perhaps a camping trip or two a year.

 

[xctasy]

With the same 3 inch or less Body Lift that the Explorer guys do, almost any thing small block will fit in an AwD Bronco II.

The frame lift allows a 240/300 4.9 liter Big Six to fit in too. Slant six is an easy fit with a body lift, the limit is the HVAC unit in and it's proximity to the valve cover on the 225. The 302 fits as it is stock, but as soon as the block deck height goes up past 9.2 inches ( Cleveland, LS Chev) or 9.5 inches ( 351W ) the engine touches the passenger side air box.

Its similar to what happens in the Panther cars when you go above the stock OHC 4.6 engines height. A 7.3 OHV, fits that no problem.

The transmission transfer case, and your greed over gear numbers causes the biggest issues. The Mustang 3.3 had a standard C3 3 speed gearbox starting 1982 and ending in late 1984 with the Fairmont and Fox Marquis, so the bellhousing allows the early A4LD V6 Cologne transmissions to bolt up with a Tig weld to reprofile the lock up clutch ATF flow path on the detachable Torx bell housing. Just like the C5 to C4 truck bellhousing.

The tougher Explorer/ Mountaineer AOD also fits to the 250 or low mount 200 bellhousing with no major changes. Just eight bolts to redrill on the 200, two bolts on the bellhousing, and six on the flexplate.

 

[Mightyfordranger]

I have a non A/C heater box to put in it which helps on space some not the end solution. So with a 3in body lift you think there's enough room for a 300 in there?

And also maybe I missed this but the "small" 250 does have the SBF pattern? And lastly is it shorter than the 300? Length wise firewall to read support length.

 

[bubba22349]

Below is the Basic 240 & 300 Inline Six Dimensions and Weight that FTF Posted a long time back it might help you figure it all out as to fitting them in your Bronco II. I also thought that we also had the 200 and 250 Six Sizes to somewhere on the site but wasn't able to find them were I thought they were. It is my best guess that a 250 Six won't be very much of a difference in their Weight nor their Length when compared to the 300 Six. Yes the 250, 240, & 300 (4.9) Sixes will all have that Same SBF Bell Housing Bolt Pattern. Good luck on your swap.

300's weigh about 490 pounds.

300 DIMENSIONS (1971 year):
FRT-FACE-OF-BLOCK to REAR-FACE-OF-BLOCK: 725 mm / 28.56"
OAL (FAN-to-CRANK-FLANGE): 931 mm / 36.65"
HEIGHT CL CRANK-to-TOP-OF-BREATHER-CAP: 486 mm / 19.12"
HT OIL-PAN-to-TOP-OF BREATHER-CAP: 690 mm / 27.17"
Sorry, no motor mount dims.