I just tell them at you local parts house it's for a 1976 Ford Mustang II with the 2.3 4cyl. I usually get them reman from advance auto parts, you have to pay something like $10.00 extra if you don't have a core (they won't take the tfi dist as a core), when you ask them for the module tell them it's got the blue plastic where the wires come out of it (don't get the ones that are either the yellow, or brown).
little help here. I have a 4 bbl intake, I think for the 2.0. will it fit the 2.3? thanks for the info. I need to know so I can sell it.
I just swapped out the top end on my 2.0 ranger motor in my avatar. I put on a 2.3 oval port head, Offy dual plane intake, and an Erson cam. I topped it off with a 390 cfm Holley. Havin' a hell of a time getting it dialed in. I'll be watching this thread . My '26 modified is laying down mid throttle. Any suggestions?
If the intake is for the early Pinto (71-73) with the EAO 2.0L it won't fit on a 2.3 (the distributor on the 2.3 would be in the way of the intake), post a pic or two, and I can tell you what it is.
I hate to give you the bad news but! With the 2.3 head on the 2.0 you lowered the compression (plus the intake ports in the oval port head are too big, even for a 2.3), the Erson cam doesn't help with the lower compression (what are the specs on the cam?). On the Holley 390 cfm 4 bbl the fuel enrichment holes in the metering block (where the power valve is) are too big, and it makes the engine go rich (even on the 2.3). The way to fix that is to drill the enrichment holes no more the a 1/16" down using a drill bit that is the same diameter of lead shot, put the lead shot in the hole, and tap it in using a small punch so the lead will stay put, then get a .017" dia drill bit, and drill through the lead shot, now that you made the enrichment smaller (the holes that Holley uses something like .030" - 035" in diameter which makes the engine go too rich when the power valve opens) There are two different ways to make your 2.0 perform better. #1) Put the 2.0 head back on with the Erson cam in it, find you a 1986 - 87 Ford Ranger with a 2.0 in it (they have a 2 bbl carb intake, but the 2 bbl carb on it computer controlled), then you would just need to make an adaptor plate for a Holley 350 cfm 2 bbl. Or. #2) Find you a good 2.3 short block with a D-port head with the Erson cam, and the Offy dual port with the 4 bbl on it with the modification to the power valve enrichment circut like I decribed earlier.
If this doesn't belong here, I'm sure somebody will let me know. Also, please tell me where it does go. Here goes... I've searched for this and can't find a clear answer. I can buy a 1992 ranger with a 2.3 and 5-speed, but there's a problem with the 5-speed. No matter where you move the shifter, it's stuck in some forward gear. I don't know which gear. I can press the clutch and start the truck, so the clutch seem to be dis-engaging like it should. If I decide to take a chance and buy this truck, any ideas where I should start looking for the tranny problem? and... What other engines shared the bell housing bolt pattern of the 2.3 should I decide to look for a replacement trans? There's also an 86 Ranger with the 2.9 and 5-speed. Do they share the same bell housing pattern? Any help appreciated. Thanks!
The 92 ranger will either have the (M50D-R1 the bell housing is part of the main case), while the later version the (M50D-R4 is basically the same but the bell housing is removable). On both of these transmissions you should be able to remove the top to look inside, if your transmission has the removeable bell housing you might be able to swap the V6 5 speed provided is it has the removeable bell housing, and or if the input shaft is the same legnth (the 2.3 bell housing bolt pattern is a little different than the 2.8 - 3.0 60 deg V6's bell housing bolt pattern. Look in mid to late 80's T-Birds, and 1985 - 93 mustangs some came with a T5 5 speed, but it's not as stout as the regular V8 T5.
There are at least two companies making adapters to put V8 bellhousing transmissions on the 2.3. Opens up a ton of transmission options.
just looked at my 2.o today or what i think is a 2.0 ..was looking for the manual fuel pump cover ..but ther isnt one only 2 holes where it should be ...what year motor is this..it came from a 87 mustang lx...maybe it was swapped out before i got it ..
My 88 ranger (I put in a 2.3 from a 89 mustang in it, and it had a block off plate) I guess in the late 80's they were using up old blocks that needed a block off plate, along with blocks that were not machined for the fuel pump arm.
The Turbo Coupe T-5 is a World Class T-5 ... just as strong as the 5.0 t-5's of the same years... I see no reason to use a V8 t-5 in a street 4cyl car honestly. Now the XR4Ti had a wienie transmission, not good enough for a turbo 2.3L but not bad for the NA 1.6, 2.0 and 2.3L and it's a little shorter and will bolt to the Pinto Bell housing allowing the use of cable instead of a hydrolic clutch. FrankBoss www.PintoWorks.com
hey guys can i have some links to performance sites for 2.0 / 2.3 ..so i can get some ideas of what iu can do to my 2.3...thanks.. oh and anyone have a carb adapter for my efi manifold...cheap..there so expensive ..
If you use the carb adapter plate to the efi intake, it will be very cold natured, and will run like crap until you get the rpm's up to around 3000-3500 rpm's (been there, done that, got the T-shirt!). You will be better off running a short runner carburator intake, on my O/T 88 ranger I have a cast iron OMC intake manifold from a D-port head 2.3 boat application (got it for $30.00 on e-bay) it mounts a rochester 2 bbl carburator sideways, I adapted a holley 350 2 bbl on mine (the sideways mount made it clear the brake booster), it runs soo much better on the street than it did with the efi/2 bbl adapter.
2.3 Ford performance parts http://www.stinger-performance.com/ http://racerwalsh.zoovy.com/c=w86C3w...ory/4cylinder/ http://www.esslingeracing.com/home.htm http://www.bo-port.com/ http://www.rheaperformance.com/ http://www.speedwaymotors.com/Produc...+ford&deptId=0 I also added these in my Ford 2.0/2.3/2.5 litre engine family guide. (see my signature)
Kenneth S<SCRIPT type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_5087980", true); </SCRIPT> hey where can i get the manifold i want it to run good ...from lower end up..i dont want any problems mine is a round port head though. what and where can i get for this head
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD colSpan=2>2.0 L PINTO(FORD) OFFENHAUSER 4 BARREL INTAKE MANIFOLD </TD></TR><TR><TD class=ipics-cell><FORM method=post name=ssFrm action=http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?VISuperSize&item=150427021490 target=ssFrmWin><INPUT value=0 type=hidden name=ssr><INPUT value=0#http://i.ebayimg.com/12#!BpRUI4g!mk~$(KGrHqIH-DIEuWIYS+lGBLqn)fcyV!~~_14.JPG#!BpRUI4g!mk~$(KGrHqIH-DIEuWIYS+lGBLqn)fcyV!~~_12.JPG|1#http://i.ebayimg.com/06#!BpRU)WQBWk~$(KGrHqEH-DUEuWlF3OBcBLqnzUmkig~~_14.JPG#!BpRU)WQBWk~$(KGrHqEH-DUEuWlF3OBcBLqnzUmkig~~_12.JPG|2#http://i.ebayimg.com/01#!BpRVcEgBWk~$(KGrHqIH-DYEu(oIvDCPBLqn1(gi+Q~~_14.JPG#!BpRVcEgBWk~$(KGrHqIH-DYEu(oIvDCPBLqn1(gi+Q~~_12.JPG|3#http://i.ebayimg.com/03#!BpRWRS!!Wk~$(KGrHqYH-CoEu,nzjTn5BLqn3v6DWg~~_14.JPG#!BpRWRS!!Wk~$(KGrHqYH-CoEu,nzjTn5BLqn3v6DWg~~_12.JPG type=hidden name=iurls><INPUT value=0 type=hidden name=dtid><INPUT value=1 type=hidden name=vs><INPUT value=0 type=hidden name=sh><INPUT value="2.0 L PINTO(FORD) OFFENHAUSER 4 BARREL INTAKE MANIFOLD" type=hidden name=title></FORM><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=vs_w-a><CENTER></CENTER> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE> is this what i want to use ..or is there something else i can find cheaper im on a tight budget. oh and is the 2.0 round port the same as a 2.3 head ? </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
That intake is for the EAO 2.0 that came in 1971-73 Pinto's, since yours is the ranger 2.0 it won't directly bolt up, plus on the 2.3 based engine the distributor get's in the way which is why the 2.3 had the intakes with striaght runners and curved intake ports in the head. I have a Ranger 2bbl intake from a 87 ranger 2.0 (the only year for a 2bbl round port head) if you make an adapter you could fit a Holley 350 cfm 2bbl on it. I'll post a pic of the 2.0 Ranger round port intake as soon as I can find it.
If the 2.0 is from a 1983-87 Ranger there is no external differences, the only difference on the Ranger 2.0 is the block is cast with a smaller bore, and it can not be bored out to make it a 2.3. The 2.3 would be a better choice (no replacement for displacement)
Kenneth S<SCRIPT type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_5090543", true); </SCRIPT> . I have a Ranger 2bbl intake from a 87 ranger 2.0 (the only year for a 2bbl round port head) if you make an adapter you could fit a Holley 350 cfm 2bbl on it. I'll post a pic of the 2.0 Ranger round port intake as soon as I can find it. is it for sale ...
This is the 2.0 in my lotus seven. It's got an isky cam with unknown specs, a italian dellarto sidedraft carb,and an msd blaster ignitor ignition. It's enough for an 1100 pound car. The exhaust manifold is ceramic coated and it's gotta painted gold valve cover just to give it something.
Im thinking of doing this to my A pick up. Anyone use the 2.3 with the dual plug set up? Thats what Im planning on using.
2.0l 2.3l 2.5l all share alot of parts cams lifter and followers i know all interchange. 2.5l rotater is a cheap stroker kit. rangers use roller cams to. i had a built 2.3l 320hp still have some of the parts left
Been looking for an engine lately and today found two. A 1983 and a 1988. Building a carbureted set up so I am wondering which would be the best to start with?
I read through a lot of the information here on the 2.3 as I use to race a 1986 Mustang SVO. I can give you guys some info on the factory turbo EFI engines that will help out because some of the info here is not right. (Note: the 97 and 88 Thunderbird turbocoupe is very different and the computer & vein meter will not interchange without some re-wiring. These years of Turbocoupes are not included in the information below except in their own section at the end.) Introduced in 1983 as 145HP in the Mustang, Capri, Thunderbird and Cougar. Same engine was used in the Mekur XR4TI. This engine combination was used through early 1985 with minor changes but the major components remained the same. Intake was Inline 4 port style. Turbo was T3 Super 60 series non-water cooled. Two bolt flanged discharge flange. This turbo is capable of 350hp when properly tuned engine. Excellent turbo other than non-water cooled. Exhaust side was .63AR ratio for all engines. Boost was limited by the waste gate without computer control at 10psi. Small outlet exhaust manifold was used which frequently crack. Can be ported for extra power on top end to match the manifold to turbo gasket but its a bitch to do and get down inside good. Fuel Injection was designed by and components provided by Bosch for Ford. Injectors are not interchangeable with the 5.0 GT Mustang engine but are with the CFI throttle body 5.0 engines for higher HP. Vein Meter is small diameter but the same for all 1983 to early 1985 vehicles including SVO's. Mekur's used the small vein meter through end of production. 1984 saw the introduction of the SVO with 175HP in the "Premium Fuel" mode, 145HP in "Regular Fuel" mode. (a switch was provided on the console to allow the driver to choose which mode he wanted to use). SVO had the regular discharge flange round hose type outlet on the turbocharger. Also was not watercooled. Still the same T3 super 60 series turbo. Exhaust was still the .63AR ratio. Boost was computer controlled to 12psi in premium fuel mode and 10psi in regular fuel mode. (these are actual readings I took on my 84 SVO) Intercooler was fitted along with the needed exhaust manifold "U" bracket and two "V" shaped brackets to support it. Computer has more aggressive programming for the "Premium Fuel" mode for the 175HP rating. (great upgrade for other 2.3 turbo engines.) Remainder of engine was EXACTLY the same as the other models. Camshafts, cylinder heads, blocks, cranks ARE the SAME! No special SVO only camshafts or cylinder heads. 1985-1/2 saw major updates across the board for all Turbo equipped Fords. The intake manifold was changed from the inline 4 port style (more restrictive) to the square 4 port style. The turbocharger was now water cooled but still the same T3 Super 60 series. This is an excellent turbo for street-strip performance up 350HP. The exhaust side was still the .63AR ratio for 5-speed vehicles and .48AR ratio for automatic equipped vehicles to improve boost response. Note: it has always been written that the 85-1/2 SVO was equipped with the .48AR ratio exhaust but on every one I have owned (7 of them) and all I have worked on (over 100) they all had the .63AR ratio exhaust. The .48AR ratio exhaust limits the top end horsepower by at least 25-30hp. It will choke the exhaust as the RPM gets above 5200rpm. Boost was limited to 12psi in premium fuel mode and 10psi in regular fuel mode. More aggressive 1984 SVO style computer and programming was used in all vehicles except the SVO. The 1985-1/2 engines are rated at 175HP (boost was 12psi) with the SVO coming in at 205HP (boost was 14psi). The SVO computer to have is coded "PE". This is the best computer to use for performance applications. (the 86 SVO used the same computer but was rated at 200HP with 14psi boost. Believed this drop was due to climate changes during the dyno testing). The Vein meter in all vehicles except the SVO's was the same. SVO's recieved the larger 3" diameter vein meters. Excellent upgrade for max HP for all vehicles. The exhaust manifold was changed to a larger port outlet. Referred to as the E6 manifold this is the best to use short of installing a stainless steel header. All major engine components, camshafts, blocks, cylinder heads, pistons, rods, crankshafts are all the same for all 1983 to 1986 engines. 1986 saw no changed to the TurboCoupe, Mekur or SVO components. Engines were rated at 175HP for all but the SVO which was 200HP. 1987-88 Thunderbird Turbocoupe had major design differences. This engine was rated at 190HP with 5-speed and 175HP with automatic. This was the final evolution of the 2.3 turbo engine from Ford with changes made to offer the best driveability and all around performance with minimal compromises. Excellent engine and 5-speed to use in street rods and engine swaps as a complete system. The turbocharger was a water cooled IHI small diameter turbo with a reduced exhaust AR ratio. Used for quicker boost response and driveability improvements. A Intercooler was added with twin scoops in the hood feeding it. This intercooler is larger than the SVO intercooler and a mild upgrade for SVO's. Horsepower add is minimal however. Computer and Vein meter are different from all previous turbo engines and will not directly interchange without re-wiring the connectors to match. Vein meter is larger diameter for better airflow across the RPM range. Intake manifold is still the square 4 port design but the upper section is lower in height for a lower profile hood. The valve cover is clearanced for the intake to fit. This intake offers the best upper rpm performance and HP without modifications. The exhaust manifold is different to match up to the IHI turbocharger. The other major engine components are the same as previous years. I could go on for ever with the mixing & matching for the best performance but I'll stop now. My preference was the SVO first, 1987-88 Turbocoupe second and all the rest last for building a killer engine. thanks, PaceRacer50
The Jalopy Journal
