Ford 3.0 Vulcan and different weight oils over yea

[CErnst]

I have a '98 Ranger with the 3.0 Vulcan. Top of the cap calls for 5w30. Later model Rangers call for 5w20 oil. I've tried to do some research on how far the 3.0 in Rangers were back spec'd to 5w20 and the consensus I found was '99. I kinda wondered why, but didn't really find any answers.

I read this relatively new article here:
http://www.therangerstation.com/tech_library/3_0-build.html
It basically says that in '99, they made the head bolts just a bit longer resulting in reduced bore distortion and better sealing rings which then resulted in reduced oil consumption and contamination.

So with that in mind, in my '98, would I conclude that if I ran 5w20 in it, I would see more contamination/consumption than I would if I ran 5w30?

 

[TallPaul]

I'd stick with the 30 weight, but then the only 20 weight I like is straight 20.

Thanks for the info on the head bolts. That may explain in part why my '92 Vulcan (Aerostar) consumes a quart every 1200 miles, but is otherwise a great engine, albeit a dog performance-wise.

 

[demarpaint]

IIRC the 3.0L was back spec'd to 20Wt oil up to and including 1993. I tried running mine on 5W20 and so far have been happy with the results. I'm actually using slightly less oil with the 5W20 vs. the 5W30. I was using about 1 qt per 1500 miles, it is now about 1700 miles +/-.

As TallPaul mentioned it is a great engine but a dog performance wise.

 

[fdcg27]

I dunno.
Our '97 Vulcan Aerostar uses maybe half a quart in 4K miles (157k total to date), so I'm not sure that longer head bolts are really a factor.
My understanding of the 5W-20 back-spec is that it applies to all Vulcans with roller valve trains, which began in '92, IIRC.

 

[demarpaint]

I think the roller valve trains came out in 93, 92 still calls for 30wt oil.

 

[TallPaul]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
As TallPaul mentioned it is a great engine but a dog performance wise.
nonetheless, it sounds pretty mean in a rice burner sort of way when I rev that puppy into the 5000s. I have had it up to 5700 rpm once on the 1-2 shift--yeeeee haaaaa!

The engine is virtually indestructable, so long as you keep it from pinging too much. Did I mention I have the timing set 11 before TDC (spec is 10) adds pep, but I run premium fuel. To run regular I need to go bout 5 before TDC and then it is the mother of all dogs performance-wise. I think my pinging may be related to the high oil consumption.

 

[TallPaul]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
I think the roller valve trains came out in 93, 92 still calls for 30wt oil.
Yeah that would make sense 20 weight okay in 93 because roller valve train. If you're not sure, can run Redline 5w20 which has HTHS of a 30 weight and plenty of antiwear, no problem for sliding lifters, but I think the engine likes thicker, maybe between 30 and 40 wt.

 

[demarpaint]

Interesting about the timing, mine is set to factory specs. I might fool with it if I ever get around to tuning it up. At 5700 rpm that bad boy must have been screaming.

How's the transmission holding up? I have 178,000 on the original and was told that it is living on borrowed time for that transmission. I have no complaints other than a slight delay going into Reverse when it gets very cold, but it has done that as far back as I can remember. ATF always comes out clean no slipping or problems shifting. Fingers crossed.

I'm going to miss that little Aerostar when the day comes to get rid of it.

 

[RF Overlord]

I have a copy of the TSB, and it does list the Ranger with the Spock motor back to '93.

I used MC 5W-20 in my sister's '96 Vulcan Taurus for 30,000 miles before she traded it in. No oil consumption issues, and it had almost 100,000 miles on it.

 

[fdcg27]

I don't have the option of easily playing with the timing, since mine doesn't have a distributor.
Ping?
Oh yeah!
Under some conditions, especially if you are using the AC, you get unreal ping.
WRT the trans, my understanding is that as long as regular partial changes are done (drop pan, replace filter, clean pan, add about 4 qts), the trans should be pretty trouble free.
If I had symptoms of real trans trouble, I'd do a cooler line flush and see what happened.

 

[tig1]

My sons 91 Ranger 3.0 has 336,000 miles and counting. It has always had M1 10-30 with a qt of oil conumption every 3500 miles from day one to this very day. The engine is still as quite as when it was new. No ticks are clacks.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
I don't have the option of easily playing with the timing, since mine doesn't have a distributor.
Ping?
Oh yeah!
Under some conditions, especially if you are using the AC, you get unreal ping.
WRT the trans, my understanding is that as long as regular partial changes are done (drop pan, replace filter, clean pan, add about 4 qts), the trans should be pretty trouble free.
If I had symptoms of real trans trouble, I'd do a cooler line flush and see what happened.


You could try a piston soak, or introduce hot water into the engine via a vacuum line. Odds are the ping could be from carbon build up, or possibly one of the sensors is not operating properly.

A piston soak would be a PIA, just getting to the plugs in that Aerostar is a horror story, and a reason why mine have been in for so long.

 

[Jeff3126]

Originally Posted By: tig1
My sons 91 Ranger 3.0 has 336,000 miles and counting. It has always had M1 10-30 with a qt of oil conumption every 3500 miles from day one to this very day. The engine is still as quite as when it was new. No ticks are clacks.


Thats good to know, as my ranger has 36k miles and has run mostly mobil 1.

 

[TallPaul]

I got the Aero at 27,000 miles and religiously had ATF changes, starting with M1 ATF but more recently Redline D4. No tranny issues, other than the fact that it will downshift farther than I want or upshift more than I want. I feel I have no control of the shifting, whereas the motorhome (454 V8) shifts well. I think the finnicky shifting is due to the underpowered engine.

 

[TallPaul]

Okay guys, let's hear it, how high have you gotten your Vulcan to rev?

Anyone ever built one of these engines? I actually think a built Vulcan would be sweet in a T-bucket. Those small block v8s are WAAAAAY too much for a T-bucket.

 

[daves87rs]

Hmmm...I'd like to know too. I'm thinking about picking up a Tauri with the Vulcan.....

 

[RF Overlord]

Originally Posted By: TallPaul
Those small block v8s are WAAAAAY too much for a T-bucket.
No such thing as too much engine.

Besides, V6s with headers and performance mufflers sound like weed-whackers on steroids.

 

[TallPaul]

Well, I guess you need big block to make good sound. GM once made (60s) a truck V6 about 300 cid, now that would sound good. My 300 I6 has a nice throaty sound. I believe even a 4 banger would sound good with big enough pisons, make one out of one bank of a 460 Ford or 454 Chevy and it would be a torque monster too.

 

[CMB]

Originally Posted By: TallPaul
Okay guys, let's hear it, how high have you gotten your Vulcan to rev?

Anyone ever built one of these engines? I actually think a built Vulcan would be sweet in a T-bucket. Those small block v8s are WAAAAAY too much for a T-bucket.


Check out the Taurus club website. Someone on there was pushing a decent amount of power through a built 3.0 vulcan.

 

[fdcg27]

Yes, the plugs would be a PITA.
That's why I was very pleased to get the garage at work to do them as a side project for $25.00, I kid you not.
I have thought that a little water through the intake might help get rid of any carbon build-up.
OTOH, this thing has always had at least some light ping to it under certain conditions.
What kind of fuel consumption do you guys see with your Aeros?
Best ever for me was an actual 25 MPG, while worst ever was around 16.
I see 22 mpg average if I use the Aero on my commute.