Ford 2.3 8 Plug Head - FREE Dual Ignition Mod: How To & Demo (+ HP & ECON)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ก.ค. 2017
- Doing the Dual ignition mod on the 4 banger rangers.
Ford 2.3 8 Plug Head - FREE HP & Economy: Dual Ignition Mod (How To & Demo)
ranger plug mod
8 plug head mod
ranger dual ignition mod
2.3 performance
2.3 8 plug head mod
2.3 8 plug head - ยานยนต์และพาหนะ
Luke. I bow in humbleness. You are the KING. I'm literally blown away by the mass of videos and data you have put out. Good God, you're a font of knowledge. Simply awestruck and amazed. Thanks for sharing your gift. I'm pretty sure no once competes with the sheer number of videos you put out and the massive data that you put forth. Your interest in this truck got me looking through the classified and I found myself a 1999 Ranger 2.5, with 5 speed manual and brand new tires. The gentleman who owned it couldn't get it started after picking up his dry cleaning and the dry cleaner told him to get it gone from his parking lot in three days. In a panic, the owner told me I could have it for $400 if I towed it in 72 hours. Done! $50 dollar tow to the house and I'm pretty sure it's a fuel pump. Can't wait to dive into this one! It also has the 8 plug head and I wonder if the same mod can be done successfully. Thanks again buddy for your efforts. You ARE the KING! Wow!
You are too friendly! Thanks so much, I’m just some average joe guy.
Now, with the ranger you just picked up - a good way to test if it’s a fuel issue is to simply pop the intake tube off of the throttle body and spray a little carb cleaner in - if it fires off, you no ignition is good and it’s only a fueling issue holding it back 👍
I'm honestly shocked this mod isn't more popular
no kidding. im going to put some miles on it and see if it causes any issues. logically, it really shouldnt whatsoever.
It probably was 25 years ago when those motors were common.
The Dude yeah I've never heard of it either
ThunderHead289 I have a few friends that did this mod and they've seen no adversed effects yet....they run these lil rangers in the mini stock races
well, time to make it well known !!!
enjoy the no shirt reflection in the ranger door HAHA
and also the rotstang beatings at the end.
still drive the old rotbody every day - need to rename it Christine.
ECON! HOORAY TREEHUGGER SALVAGE!
Subscribed! You have a wealth of knowledge when it comes to cars and that was a wicked burn out at the end in a car that you worked on yourself! Awesome! Respek from NYC!!
Picked up a 1990 vintage ranger for $800; needed some work, new radiator and hoses, dead starter. Also found coils for 2&3 weren't firing, swapped the "exhaust" pack or whatever you want to call it until the new coil arrived. I'm going to give this mod a shot not that I've got 2 fully functional coil packs. Thanks!
the best thing you can do to the ranger is put a electric fan on it.
I did this mod yesterday working out very well thanks for the tip.
Five years ago you posted how's it working out to date
I had one of those, put dual exhaust out the back eith 3" chrome tips and it was awesome, sounded like a mad hornet.
I have a 96 Ranger I should have looked at some of the videos because we pulled the manifold to get to those back ones and I see we could have done it without that but this mod about the coils it's kind of cool I appreciate it I'm subscribed to your channel now
Great video (I bet the owner of the freshly painted parking lot lines was pissed LoL) I was wondering if it would fire off the secondary cool pack.
Great video
I realize this video is a year old, but I have to say I had a '94 Ranger from '98 to '03 and I would *not* call it an economy ride. It will probably be better than your larger trucks, but my 4.0L Ranger loved guzzling that fuel.
I had a 87 Nissan hard body 2.4 pickup it had a early version of this 8 wire distributor firing both plugs on the power stroke
Any updates with this bad boy? I love these old rangers and enjoy seeing you fix this one up, I've owned several square body rangers and they'll always be my favorite!
WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO My daddy told me this but I forgot how to swap the packs. THanks so friggin MUCH!!!! I bought a black truck for 400, spend 200 in parts plus labor now this truck worth 2500$ and runs like a dream.
Great vid ... Hard to kill ... Fun to try lol
Hi, I have a 90 Ford Ranger 2.3 and I want to connect a Tech, but I don’t know where to connect the green wire, so I wanted to ask if you could show me where do you connect yours? Please! Thanks Love you’re videos.
Dumb question but where did you wire the green tachometer wire into? I have a 1990 Ford Ranger with a 2.3L and so far I have had little success finding where this wire is supposed to connect or splice into.
This is a DIS "wasted spark" system, so sparks * always * occur near the tops of both the compression stroke and the exhaust stroke for each cylinder. That's why each coil pack has only three wires: Ignition (+), 1&4 coil (-) and 2&3 coil (-). In other words, each coil pack has only two primaries and two secondaries, and the secondaries have plug wires at both ends of their respective coils. When a DIS secondary "fires" near the top of every stroke, a spark is "pulled" across one plug gap and "pushed" across the companion plug gap. The spark occurring near the top of the exhaust stroke is "wasted", but since there is no compression at that particular moment, it uses very little energy, and the companion cylinder near the top of its compression stroke gets the huge majority of the voltage drop (and therefore energy). By swapping the plug wires at the coil towers for cylinders 2 & 3 and cylinders 1 & 4, you are not changing this behavior in the least bit. All you are doing with your "mod" is changing the polarities of the secondaries, causing the sparks to travel in the opposite directions. This will cause the spark plugs to exhibit slightly different wear patterns, but will have * absolutely no other effect *.
So it's definitely not worth it?
So it's not worth it?
Idk much about vehicles, seeing two coil packs on a 4 cylinder threw me off a lil. But like I said idk much about engine stuff. In the process of learning by working my my ranger,,
Awesome! Interested to hear about gas mileage after the mod.
What is the RPM p.m. boost when you go to to spark plugs firing on the Powerstroke versus one?
So, how's it been since the mod? How much improved performance/fuel efficiency?
Great thinking !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 2.3 Engine has been around for a long time and been in many vehicles: tractors, trucks, cars, and works items with many different Manufactures and Countries!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! A Work Horse Engine!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Been searching for your other 2.3 L Ranger vids. I see the Lucas Trans vid and the timing belt vid. Have any more ? ThankS
Dont mean to crowd your page, but i found some more info on this mod.
This is for 91-93 owners. This is the TRUE "dual plug ignition mod" not the pointless (and infamous) plug wire swap! It's extremely easy to do. It only took me 15 min once I figured everything out. I got a lot of info from threads on DIS conversions over on turboford.net.
Step 1: Locate the ICM (on the front of your intake manifold)
Step 2: Look for the number 6 printed upside down bellow the top connector (black) on the ignition module, it's the pin closest to the engine.
Step 3: Remove the electrical tape around the wiring harness
Step 4: Follow the wire coming out of the connector on pin 6, it should be blue/green stripe. Trace the wire back as far as you can, it should be at a "T" junction where it enters the main harness.
Step 5: Cut the wire and crimp a small eyelet on the side that comes from the ICM connector. You should have about 6" of wire to work with.
Step 6: Remove the top 5.5mm bolt that holds the ICM to the intake.
Step 7: Slide the bolt through the eyelet and reinstall the bolt.
Step 8: Re-wrap the harness with electrical tape. That's it, your done!
The wire you grounded out is used for the Dual Plug Inhibit function. The EEC applies power to this circuit when the key is in the start position. This signal is used by the ICM to inhibit secondary coil pack operation bellow 1500 RPM. The EEC doesn't monitor the circuit, so you shouldn't get a CEL. Now both plugs will fire at the same time; all the time giving you better throttle response!
WARNING: Since the dual plug setup was originally designed to decrease emissions modifying the system may cause you to fail smog. My opinion: I really don't think it will cause a fail, but I have to cover myself just in case. If it made that much of a difference on emissions then all 4 plug 2.3s would fail. =)
This say 91-93 owners. But what about 94? I have both coil packs on the passenger side of my engine, as I assume 91-93 owners do. I'm hoping this mod would work for me as well!
The pistons move upward on the exhaust stroke. The spark plugs fire on the compression stroke when the piston hits TDC.
oh you'll choose to drive it I have an 89 ranger and love it and that's coming from a Chevy guy 😃
I'm a Chevy guy too and I have a 92 ranger that I absolutely adore
You do understand that each coil fires 2 cylinders at the same time? Hint, each coil has 3 wires, 12v and 2 control wires for each half of the coil, put 2 and 2 together.
I'm swapping a Turbo coupé Thunderbird 2.3 into a 1990 ranger now. Pretty easy swap.
I had previously wanted to do a carburated 302 swap, but I now think the turbo 2.3 with an intercooler is the way to go!
How long did it take and did you use the Thunderbird transmission I have 1994 Ford ranger and thinking of doing same thing
After you plugged the driver side in and restarted the aftermarket tach worked
I’m curious if this worked out okay for you long term? Also, any idea on mpg gains?
Wow, I tried this on my truck this morning and it made a huge difference. I don't notice any more power but the engine runs way smoother. Its a 5 speed and would lug and buck some when shifting unless I roasted the clutch. Now it does fine, even in reverse. Like, it is way better, more like how modern engines feel. Before it was like there was dead space in between combustions or something.
The one thing I did notice is a little hesitation if I really punch it, but it might have done that before. Also I think my spark plugs are really worn out. I wonder if the mod wouldn't be as effective on an engine with fresh plugs.
Day and friggin night.
Alfa Romeo has plenty of inline4 engines with twinspark setup. 8valve and 16valve
I believe the US got the 75 Milano 2.0L ? those were 8valve twincam engines and delivered 155hp.
my bike is a Kawa ZR1100, it has 4cil and twinspark fired by 4 coils. it works great.
My daily driver has on of these engines. It a realy unice setup. There are two versions of this engine. The older one had 4 coils, fireing cylinder 1+4 (2+3) by the one coil and 4+1 (3+2) at the same time by a seccond coil. The engine will still run if two coils are not working like on a airplane engine with redundant ignition. The later engines had also 4 coils but every coil fires both plugs of one cylinder.
My '78 Fiat had dual point ignition, where it had a second ignition system built into the distributor.
Question.. I have a 94 Ford ranger 2.3 , 2wheel drive. I'm having issues with one of the coil pact not sparking. I have changed spark plugs and wires n the truck is still struggling as if it has a misfire n I checked the front coil pact n it wasn't sparking but the back one was. I have already replaced the front coil pact and it's still doing the same thing. Any suggestions on what it might be? Thanks.
Something I have always wanted to see is a dual plug turbocoupe swap, or a 2.3 turbo in a Ranger. I'm sure it's been done before, but it's something I have always wanted to do personally.
if i wasnt horrified of power routers outside of nitrous, id probably try.
ThunderHead289 Honestly, I used to be too, but after I bought an import I had to do something and stock Honda engine don't usually respond well to nitrous unless it's pulled apart and had the rings gapped properly. I've had 52 vehicles since I was 14, and most of those were American cars. This last one was a 97 Civic and it's original single cam was garbage, but once it had a turbo and a few supporting mods it was so much fun that I ended up swapping for a dual cam engine, then boosted it, then added VTEC, then forged internals, and now it makes 508 whp in a 2250 lb car. You would be surprised by this little bastard. I still have my diesel Ram, but this little thing is addictive.
i dont blame you there for sure! there are a ton of guys around my area that do the boosted small engine stuff. personally i just have never had the time to get into it. the 8 hour a day job, house, dogs, and woman keep me pretty busy it seems !!!!
This a question for your main jets video on a carb when I put new ones in
do the main jets have to be tightened all the way clockwise and left alone or do you turn all the way clockwise then turn counterclockwise a certain number of turns? I have a 4160 Holley 4 barrel non adjustable float
Thanks for this video but i dont understand how you get the passenger coil power up i have a 97 ford ranger and one of the coil not powering up how can i get in touch with you
I thought I killed this modification myth in 2010 on Ford ranger forum. It is physically impossible for this to work because it was designed to work that way from the factory. They have a waste spark ignition system, both coil packs fire a plug on the power stroke and a plug on the opposed cylinder that is on the exhaust stroke. There are two daul post coils per pack, the cylinder that is under compression has the strongest spark. They did this as a cost cutting measure because it's less moving parts.
This is actually untrue that it doesn’t work - I messed with some other rangers of different years. The only ones it works on are the rangers that have the coil packs on opposite sides of the engine - this was only for two years. After that, ford did have it fire all the time, which if you open the hood and see the coil packs together - that’s what you have.
That’s how this mod got popular - because it actually was a thing a one point in ranger production models
oh my God you're taking me back to the 80s when I used to thrash on my Pinto 2300 or 2.3 I used to run a thrush header Muffler backwards at the rear bumper with the header flange facing rearward like a trumpet and it sounded like one of these new ricers I was doing that back in the 80s before ricers were ever popular with the exhaust can or whatever they call it I was making that stuff out of spare junk
and really nowadays, folks pay a lot to have that same type of junk! interesting world we live in!
I've got a 92 ranger and one thing that I noticed that is different is my coil packs for both drivers and passenger side head plugs both reside on the passenger side of the engine next to each other instead of each one being on either side of the engine
Thats how the newer style 2.3's run. I've started building them for offroad applications and its .ore desirable,keeps them dry and more accessible.
Mine are on either side but the drivers side one is damn near impossible to. Get to without pulling at. Least the alternato
I noticed the engine sounded slightly different when you unplugged the primary coil. Maybe it dropped in RPM's just a little.
I think that's a sign that it likes running on 8 plugs at once!
+Kyle Love if I had to guess, the head chamber is designed for that primary coil to be the ignition, so I would assume that the flame front is not as efficient when running solely on that exhaust plug -
ThunderHead289 I totally agree with that theory.
Yup the trick with the Ranger is cool ....but handing out some whoop Ass on the rotstang . I'm pretty sure I know why the doors don't close , take close look at the last part of your burn out ..talk about some body flexing pretty good stuff .
just wait until i finally get the power tour video up. - there is some pretty janko stuff holding the driver side rear torque box to the body
that was a fun video! you definitely know your shit,man.
This is a troll myth.. Ford designed this ignition system to fire both plugs at the same time at the factory
What i drove my 93 without the passenger side coil plugged in for 3 months n my truck ran
Will this work on a 98 ranger 4 banger?
@thunderhead289: the "front" of the coil faces the front of the Truck, or the firewall/ coil connector? FYI: My Ranger has both coils on the passenger side of the engine.
You are very good at what you do very smart when it comes to engines wish I knew half
Would this work in a 96? It's a 2.3 8 plug but my coils are both on the passenger next to each other. Seems like this would help me because it idles rough when it's cold like its barely running.
My 92 has the same set up. I looked up the cylinder order and it is different then his model. I would like to know the wire swap for my model. Would I follow the verbal and ignore the visual?
It should be the same concept., fucking with my demon for several months, I labeled the ignition coil’s. I’m going to swap out what the man says and see.
Is the eight plug head a standard fitment for you guys? Is that what we call a Lima engine? I have a 2.3 petrol in my van but it's only a four plug engine.
We call them the Lima as well, sometime in the late 80s they went to the 8 plug head style
did you ever find out if it actually improved your power and mpg?
Is there a hole behind you coil pack one that's not needed? Mine is open hole should it have something there?
Ever think about adding a SVO TURBO HEAD and TURBO??? Might be Interesting!
You can fit the 16V DOHC head from an early '90s Volvo onto the Lima pretty easily with a little modification.
I think the zip ties will work or maybe a spacer. There's like an inch in between the pedal and end of cable under the dash. Do you think that would work?
it would definitely work, but i would check for some form of adjustment. if there isnt, some form of a spacer and zip tie assortment will work. my biggest caution is that you dont do anything that can bind and end in you getting hurt via throttle stick.
What are you talking about zipties are they for the plastic grommet for clutch pedal ford infamous plastic grommet that doesn't work
How good does it do on efficiency if you do that
Was the firing order diagram you showed the factory one?
DID YOU DO THE MPG VIDEO YET ON THE RANGER ?
I have a 96 model ranger...2.3 l. 8 plugs. Will that work for my engine?
Andrew Fotopoulos no - Iv noticed this mod is only for speed density
Did you check the timing?
Up to 95 . install 96 up rocker arms. 5.0 tb and cai. And dual fire packs. Cheap mods that work.
any update?
Another thing is if you have access to the manual and access to TH-cam using their greatest tools in the book if you have background knowledge to understand it
i have a 2000 and a 1993 and i can unplug either coil pack and it runs. what year mod does this cover? or are your firing patterns wrong on the waste spark coil or are my firing patterns wrong on the waste spark coil? i'm totally hit on this one lol think about it.
+John Doe I believe that once ford moved the coil packs together (whatever year that is) they would then fire at the same time. Seems like this just applies to the older rigs
oh ok, i get it now
that's crazy how ford didn't even realize until later that they could just fire both plugs on the compression stroke to increase power. it's like their overdriven extra gear on their 5r transmissions.
Does this work the same way if both coil packs are on the passenger side ?? Still swap 1 and 4 / 2 and 3 ??
It does not apparently. It seems to be only for this few year span of truck
where did you run your crank case vent hose? i see you disconnected it from the intake and its running to driver side fender. . .
flyingjeep911 that’s for another video I have been working on that I will put together soon - pcv vs open breather. That was my first go around with open breather, but I felt it wasn’t enough- so I added ventilation. It will be in an upcoming video
ThunderHead289 Kool, I have 85 with the 2.3 so I’ll be looking for your side of the situation. and with every vehicle I’ve owned I’ve never liked the idea of blow-by going into my clean air of my intake. I understand it’s for smog purposes so we don’t burn holes in the o-zone. . .
ill be going over pcv in some pretty good detail for sure.
Did you get more power
Here's a question for you.. in a manual, when you do a burnout then peel out, when the tires get grip does it not suddenly jerk the clutch and stall the engine? Never done brnouts before I'm still rebuilding the engine on my 66
it really depends, unless you lift, they slowly hook back up and you dont get that jolt. its basically the same as a clutch dump if they did - obviously you need the right clutch for the intended usage. the rotstang has a very heavy clutch. also - the springs in the clutch help to absorb that immediate torque shunt.
ThunderHead289 gotcha. Since you're a ford guy, what would you recommend as a trans for a 66 mustang as a daily driver but also fun car? I was thinking t5 but some people say they're fragile..
T5 is fragile, but they're also cheap and easy to get... If you've got the money, get a TKO.
Johnny Appleseed get a 99-04 v-6 Mustang trans. all over craigslist and junk yards.
the rotstang runs a t5 and i have been unmerciful to it. they hold up very well as long as you are not doing high rpm clutch drops from a stand still.
Be aware if you straight pipe it and try do burn outs you well shoot a cylinder rod threw the oil pan I have a Ford ranger 1994 4 cylinder manual that's identical
Why would this happen?
IV GOT A 96 4 CYLINDER DOUL PLUG AFTER WORMING UP THE MOTHER GO'S IN TO RUOGH IDEAL AND A MISS LIKE ALL OTHERS 😠("WHY!!!!!!!!!!") THANK U😊
You can't burn fuel on the exhaust stroke. It has to be compressed for the spark plug to ignite, and even if it did burn on the exhaust stoke, you got serious issues with that much leftover fuel, and if it did burn, that would be horrible for the engine firing while another cylinder should. The waste spark system is not an emissions thing, its just simpler for it to fire in pairs. And it fires the WASTE spark with the cylinder that's on compression so that it couldn't be more opposite or cause an ignition timing problem.
The catalytic converter is what burns off anything extra.
The EGR valve is what controls exhaust temperature, keeping pinging/spark knock away.
Putting the same amount of fuel against two sparks, even if you could without some serious rewiring, isn't changing a thing.
Would you put two polite lights on a stove? Probably not cause it already starts with one.
Doesn't anyone think that Ford would have just made them like this if it was better? Again, a waste spark sytem has nothing to do with emissions. It wouldn't be called a WASTE SPARK if it did anything but waste a spark. You can't trick the engine into firing differently by doing this.
You wanna get more power from a 2.3/2.5 Lima? Fuckin re-gear it, change the tire size, and leave the engine stock cause they run the best the way they were built. There's hardly a thing you can do to an EFI speed density engine to improve performance besides to maintain it, convert it to MAF, or swap the engine.
mi Ranger funciona igual desconectando cualquiera de las dos bobinas, yo creia que al desconectar la bobina principal no encenderia, pero me di cuenta de que si funciona igual solo con la bobina secundaria, eso significa que ambas bobinas funcionan al mismo tiempo, y no le he modificado nada, asi viene de fabrica
Your coils are probably right beside each other - it only works for this era range truck. That's the difference I've seen
@@ThunderHead289 ok muchas gracias amigo, eso lo decubri porque tuve algunos problemas , y para averiguar que estaba fallando hice muchas pruebas entre ellas lo de las bobinas, solo fallaba cuando hacia calor en el dia, hasta que di con la falla, la falla fue de bomba de gasolina, me costo trabajo encontrar la falla porque solo fallaba cuando hacia calor en el dia, saludos cordiales
What would happen if someone gets the wrong wires in wrong place on accident bent valves dented pistons 2.3l ? Only thanks
Your ignition timing or when a plug fires has no bearing on your geometric relationship between your pistons and valves ....
That year 2.3litre is a no interference motor
Also... Idk much about the 8 plug design but how does it fire the secondary plug on the exhaust stroke???
That's counter productive as far as I know.
Is it firing at 358 degrees or so as the intake stroke is just about to start???
My dad had a 4 banger ranger before, i should of done this if i knew it. Does it add more pep to the truck?
Peter Kapica I'm sure it will add a little
it has more low end grunt (spoiler, iv driven it already a bit). didnt notice any difference above 3000 rpm into the throttle. but low rpm and cruising throttle angles, its definitely better.
ok, and researching this topic, it seems this is the improper way, the proper way is to mess with the ICM connector to block off the signal to it so it fires at all times but that sets a check engine light
im assuming i have read the same forum stuff - this is the only way that works right it seems (tested by unplugging coils) either way, it wont hurt anything. the truck has new plugs and new wires, and i could feel a definite increase in low end grunt.
Peter Kapica that way doesn't work i tried it did it word for word. what happended was i had no power and was backfiring pretty bad i could barely make it around the block
Thunderhead289 I know this isn't relevant to the video but if you can help me out it would be amazing me and my dad have a 86 Camaro with a 350 we just got a guy to put a Edelbrock carburetor on it with a new manifold and distributor it's a HEI distributor I think it's a 650 or 500 the part number on the carburetor is 1404 and the car has a pressure regulator on it with a stock fuel pump in it it was a tune port injected car we're having problems with the pressure we don't have the return line hooked up and the pressure gauge says it's stuck at 7 PSI what should I do I think the car is flooding a little bit because we had to change spark plugs and all the spark plugs were wet with gas me and my dad is not very familiar with modifying cars like this so any info would be awesome
the first item of business would be to get that pressure down. do you have any videos on your channel i could take a look at to help this along?
ThunderHead289 I do not have any video on my channel the pressure regulator will go from 7 PSI to 9 and it will bounce sometime it's like the pressure regulator cannot handle the pressure that's a thought pump is putting out and I've had a lot of people say that we need to hook up a return line to the pressure can Escape and go back into the tank me and my dad is going to mess with it this weekend it's a project for me and him hopefully we can figure it out because we don't want to spend more money on spark plugs because it takes 4 hours to get all the spark plugs out they're almost impossible to get to
+1911 world definitely consider a return line and return style regulator located in line after the carb. If it's the stock injected pump, I'm sure it's pretty hard to regulate properly
ThunderHead289 yep it has the stock fuel pump in it and originally the pump put out about 50 psi and the Edelbrock carburetor can only handle what 5 or 6 Maybe the car already has a return line but not it but the person plugged it off what would be the best way to hook up a regulator I have never messed with one and for the most part I don't know what I'm doing and also this is my first carbureted vehicle that we have messed with in a very long time and I appreciate you helping me out man you have a great Channel I love what you do
Mine will run on each of the two coil packs. I unplugged one at a time and it stayed running. Is that not supposed to be like that?
I bet your coil packs aren't like mine - this has been some time ago, but this video is only true for the engines that don't have the coil packs beside each other.
Burn the tires n do some donuts in that little ranger
Is there a way to adjust the throttle cable on a 94 thunderbird with a 4.6L v8?
what do you want to adjust, is the throttle sloppy or do you want to adjust your idle speed?
ThunderHead289.... The throttle cable has a lot of play in it. On the throttle body and on the accelerator pedal. I checked Autozone and called the ford dealer and they said that it was discontinued.
is there slack in it to where you can put a zip tie in it to take up the tolerance? it would be at the peddle. does this make sense?
Old coinchaser so, follow the cable from the pedal to the throttle body. Look for some sort of nut, screw, etc. most cables have adjusting nuts. If it doesn't, you'll need a new cable. If you can't get a new one, use the zip tie trick thunderhead mentioned.
ol johnny makes a very good point. well said
Have any problems with it? And how do I know if I'm running lean. I've got an 87 ranger 2.3 5 speed
If your timming is advanced slightly it will run lean and cause the engine to add to much gas at wrong time. Stank stankey
@@stevereid5885 have any problems with this.mod at all?
I just switched my ignition wires with this mod today. I will get back to you in a week. I have done a bunch of work on my 1990 Ranger 2.3l manuel transmission including (head gasket, timming belt, all new gaskets. I set the timming advance 5 degrees and it was running lean... Now it's adjusted properly and running awesome!
@@stevereid5885 how did it work?
@@jagrgreen8123 not even worth the time really...
it'll only cause problems if your engine runs lean. *engine idles at 1700 rpm*
What about 1700? But yes, more ignition timing via dual spark(side effect) with a dirty filter or vacuum leak will (lean) is not what you would want
ThunderHead289 1700 rpm is very high for idle, you likely have a vacuum leak. It should idle around 800rpm
put a 347 stroker in that pic
Let's just jump right to a mans engine - 408 stroker
that works definitely a tight fit always wanted a V8 Ranger just never knew how to do it I was told you had to beat the firewall
its a lot of work, but many folks have done it. im on a few v8 ranger facebook pages. i just dont have the time these days or at least currently for that much body and frame alteration.
No downside? Or is it one of those emission-reducing things.
the original set up is one of those emissions things. its to "burn the unburnt fuel" - i say forget that, im going to burn it when it matters.
Lol! yeah, that does sound like a better idea!
every engineering move is one of economic efficiency not necessary one of technical efficiency, you bring the proof that things can be better
Can anyone confirm or debunk this Comment I found on a forum from some know it all.
"That is a 2 channel coil (wasted spark system). It fires #1 + #4 and #2 + #3 at the same time as pairs. That means when the #1 cyl is being fired on its exhaust stroke, #4 is being fired on its compression stroke. (ignoring the other coil, for now.) Switching 1 + 4 does nothing, except move which terminal, on the same channel of the coil, the wire attaches to.
With this 2 coil system, wasted spark system, you always have both plugs firing on both the comp and exh stroke. One is being fired on the main coil (on purpose), the other is being fired on the secondary coil (as wasted spark).
If both spark plugs were to fire at the exact same time in two different locations would that not cause two flame fronts to collide creating abnormally high cylinder pressure? When carbon or high compression ignite the fuel mixture in a second location the two flame fronts traveling toward each other and the rapidly expanding gasses cause extreme but short cylinder pressure. So.... two plugs firing at the same time would cause the engine to detonate or ping. I have not messed with a 2.3L dual plug head, but I would have to assume the second set of plugs fires after the main burn in hopes of igniting any un-burned combustables for emissions"?
Did you listen to the video? The secondary fires on the exhaust stroke. It's mainly for emissions. Did you see his demonstration of the truck running on the secondary coil only? Here's a tip: there aren't professionals on forums, they are too busy working on the subject to go home and keep working for free.
@@colormesarge Nothing wrong with trying to get a consensus bro. =) And how could you possibly know whether a professional chimes in on a forum or not?
Anthony Wayne
You’re absolutely right. They fire in simultaneous pairs, alternating compression and exhaust strokes. The coil packs only have three wires feeding each- one common and two signals to hit the two solenoids alternatively from the ignition control module. If you want both plugs to fire simultaneously on compression stroke you’d either have to swap the wires at the coil pack of the passenger side (exhaust fire) or parallel the coil pack signal wires to force them to fire the same (at least that’s how I see it)
I stumbled on this vid because I’ve got a check engine light- codes 222, 223, 224. Basically the primary side isn’t firing. It’s running off of the exhaust side plugs. Either bad coil, bad ignition module or bad crank position sensor.
This mod would work in theory, but some wiring needs to be done to get them to fire right
What're your render settings? It's so hard to watch with the borders on that video haha.
i know, that was quite the stupid editing mistake.
Could yoU do the same mod on the 2.9l?
No, the 2.9l is a v6 with single spark plugs
spark isn't a magical force of energy which burns fuel. It only sets off an explosive chain reaction, the spark itself is a very small insignificant force of energy. having more spark wont actually burn more fuel, or produce a "more efficient burn" but it will change the rate at which the fuel (the chain reaction) sets off. this is wasted on an engine which is not tuned for this. its a very fine process. not only the timing would need to be changed, but the stroke would also need to be different. this is why OEM spark plugs are always recommended, because the engine is actually designed for them. after market plugs which try to deliver more spark are a total waste.
i do have to agree with this as it is easily demonstrated in carbureted engine.
but i also cant argue with the seat of the pants feel and less cruising throttle angles required to move down the road that i can feel.
here is my thought as to why it works in this application - via timing light, the timing curve of the 2.3 is not very aggressive/advanced per rpm (id assume because its a heavy truck) so this avoids detonation from a quicker flame front. on the flip side, the fuel charge is being ignited from both sides of the cylinder head, so the fuel is more completely burned vs what would normally be wasted and exiting the exhaust pipe.
on a carbed engine tuned for power, everything else equal - i would pull ignition timing since you do not require the advance due to the faster flame front - just like what you have to do with higher compression engines (more cylinder pressure - faster burn rate).
im not sure what, or how you are feeling anything, but if adding more spark ever changes anything, then maybe the distributers were very weak to begin with. i also forgot to mention that adding more spark only works if its introduced at additional point. so that two chain reactions are started from separate points.
I mean no offense, but i have to respectfully disagree with you.
read my last reply.
also -
different point - 2 plugs. 2 different locations.
...this is why the 5.7 hemi uses 16 plugs. to introduce an additional spark from a different point
it has 2 spark plugs per cylinder. that creates 2 points where it starts to burn and halves the time to take to completely burn. also there's always gonna be areas that don't completely burn. having an additional spark plugs helps cover those areas.
Trying this on a 93 both packs are up top, does that matter
Yep, it won’t work
@@ThunderHead289 I just tried it and in actually sounded better, and burnt a lil carbon, but as far as actually helping, I haven't drove it yet
@@rickyallgeyer9254 any long term effects from doing this? I’ve got a ’93 2.3L 5-speed 2WD with 3.45 gears. It’s my daily commuter and has problems getting out of its own way trying to pull the hills on the way to and from work. I average around 20mpg with it running about 70mph. I’m looking to maybe get better mileage if not a bit more power out of it.
Just did it, it works fine, but I don't feel the actual improvement.
The secret sauce behind the different likely only matters if you have the ignition design that has the coil configuration that I have here which apparently was only for 2 years.
Busco un arbol de elevas para mazdab2300 de el año1996 gasolina 8espares para carreras
when is the update video coming out?
I could make it anytime really - what would you like to know? - i can tell you outright. i drive the ranger daily now. put almost 4,000 miles on it thus far.
Just wondering if there has been any problems? Have you noticed any gains? mpg or power difference?
Here is kind of the run down - I am currently getting 26 mpg combined (i drive 50 to 60 miles at 75 mph every day) gains - seems like it has more low end grunt, comes off the line very smooth. it slightly advanced your ignition timing by means of a quicker flame front in the chamber - i havent had any issues with it.
iv also deleted the egr, pcv, and gas tank evap lines.
ok great thanks. Also a video on the deletes you did would be nice too. I have a 94 ranger 5 speed with the same engine you have.
Gotcha - i think mine is speed density while yours is MAF, but id imagine everything would be similar. the trick was modding the throttle body to function properly.
Would you sell me your Ford ranger? XD
3:25 . I don't get it... I can make the same gas explosion with one match as I can with two.. The spark that causes the explosion and the fumes that explode are two different things.. I won't get anymore fire using two matches on a cup of gas than one... As long as the one spark is sufficient to start the explosion process the second one is a waste .. If you have raw UN exploded fumes coming out your tail pipe ... Well you don't need but one spark plug mounted back there somewhere to explode that gas.. Its like throwing a match on an already burnt house tour not going to accomplish much... Two for one in this case is a big waste of money and a rip-off...
put a 4 valve 2.3 volvo head on it.
Is it a direct fit?
@@hajileserpud9539 no got to shave part of the head off in pretty sure
Than you should double the gas mileage
The exhaust side plugs are on the right side of the engine. Youre swapping the left side plug wires.
You are incorrect
@@ThunderHead289 My 89 2.3 exhaust ports are on the right side of the engine. The wires to those plugs are on that side too.
Any problems yet,
Will this work on a newer engine?
like firing a gun. if you hit the primer harder its not going to make the bullet fire harder. you are just insuring the primer compound does a better job of reacting
WTF??? The system is designed to fire at the same time. One side doesn't fire on the exhaust cycle! Aircraft engines fire simultaneously and are tested before take off with a power reduction being noticed when you switch from dual to single ignition. If yours was set up this way it was defective.
I’ve looked into this further - they only did it this way for about 2 years. When they went to both coils on the passenger side, they no longer did it this way
There's a common problem with them,..........they run too fast and don't idle down,......and I don't know the fix for that,...... I have seen it 3 times.
The people don't like to go to the dealers for that problem.
This is total bs. The dual plug ranger only has 4 coils, two per pack. Both plugs fire twice per cycle. Basically every time the piston hits tdc. How do I know this? The coil packs are the exact same as in the 2v 4.6. Do yourself a favor and pull both wires you swapped and check if you don't believe me. I'm sorry, but there's no "free horsepower" here. And even if what you are saying was true, firing both plugs at the same time is only a performance feature with high compression engines running race gas. In the case of the ranger, it is for emissions only.
When then coils moved to both vein on the passenger side, they both fire at the same time. On this rig the driver fires on exhaust. Fact.
But I have found for it to only be on this design.
ThunderHead289 you are absolutely correct, the driver side does fire on the exhaust. It also fires on the ignition. Same with the passenger side. Both plugs fire twice during the complete cycle, every time the piston hits tdc. Try this, swap your plugs back to normal and disconnect your passenger coil. Or swap the wires on your passenger coil. I bet it still runs normally.
Joshua Black yeah, that’s the thing. It absolutely doesn’t run if on the standard set up I pull the passenger coil. While running, it will immediately die. Fact.
On later models, they stay running.
This plug order deal came from somewhere you have to remember. The new design refutes it entirely and that’s why I would assume there is so much back and forth on the topic
ThunderHead289 here's the problem, the newer system (94 and up I believe) and the older system, use the exact same coil. I even double checked just now (part # 2-5186) so unless Ford put some failsafe on the older system but not on the newer, there's a problem here.
Joshua Black just because it used the same coil doesn’t mean it gets sent the same signals. For instance. The new design - coils both on passenger side will start no matter which coil you have unplugged. The older unit will not if you unplug the passenger side. Fact - I show it in my video.
Wish I would have shown it cutting out when I unplug the passenger side. Then all the nay sayers would be pacified. Unfortunately I don’t have the truck anymore.