Turbo on a 2.3 litre

[Birdracing]

Hey Guys newbie here awesome site after getting some info already, here is what i am wondering about i have a 94 Ranger with the 2.3 litre this motor has 8 plugs,

1. What size turbo
2. What other materials are needed
3.What est h\p do you think i will get from a stock motor

Any info will be so much appreciated trying to get on the right path with this build, once again thanks

[Sevensecondsuv]

http://www.therangerstation.com/tech...ry/Turbos.html

1. Stock HP on the merkurs and 83-86 T-birds was 175 HP.
2. Stock HP on the 87-88 T-birds was 200 HP.
3. Stock HP on the 85.5-86 SVO mustangs was 210 HP. Please do not hack up an SVO for it's engine. The merkurs and T-birds are much easier to find anyways.

How much horsepower over stock is question of "how much time and money do you have?". Based on the questions you're asking, I think this swap might be a little over your head.......

[Birdracing]

Sorry for asking kinda dumb questions but this truck will be my everyday beater, as in getting in over my head well i just build a 400+ 350 vortec in a 2nd gen Firebird...

I was planning on just installing a Garrett turbo on my motor now and go from there i have never done a turbo build before, and i'm always up for a challenge

[scotts90ranger]

if you're wanting to boost the stock engine, 5psi is about all you'll get without swapping out parts like going to forged pistons and bigger injectors and stuff...

[Birdracing]

I'm going to get new injectors right off the bat along with a new MAF as well, this project won't be starting until the fall of the year, give me sometime over the summer to collect some parts...

[Sevensecondsuv]

Just swapping to the factory turbo electronics is going to be much less work than a different MAF and fuel injectors, considering your truck is EEC-IV and there is very little aftermarket tuning support for it.

Some of the 80's ford 2.3 turbo cars ran 35 lb/hr injectors and had a VAM (vane air flow meter) and computer to match them. These three things are a very easy swap in a EEC-IV ranger and come with a factory tune setup up for the very thing you're trying to build: a turbo 2.3. They're good for about 300 HP, at which point you need bigger injectors and a big MAF and the computer transfer function to go with. This is possible on the turbo computers because there is aftermarket support for them, whereas you're pretty much plotting your own course trying to modify the ranger computer's code.

And do yourself a favor and just put the turbo pistons in before you boost it. The only thing 5 PSI is going to do for you is make you wish it was 10, and then you'll want 15, 20..... etc. Turbo pistons are a must!

You could probably but a used set of factory turbo pistons, computer, VAM, and injectors for what you're talking about spending on an aftermarket MAF and injectors.

[Birdracing]

For now i am just going to go with 5 or 6psi until i can get a set of turbo pistons, and spend money on forged parts as well.. Like i typed earlier this is my everyday driven vehicle, that is also used as a work truck on weekends..

Here where i live it is going to be hard to track down an earlier 2.3 motor out of a Mustang, Thunderbird because for starters alot of guys wants a pile of money for parts, and they are hard to track down as well..

[Sevensecondsuv]

The pistons are the only internal part that is different between your motor and a turbo motor. The rods are the same part number and good to about 100 HP apiece. The cranks would be the same except your's has smaller main bearing journals (which are actually stronger). The oil pump pickups are different as well, but only because the oil pans are different (the cast alluminum ranger pan is better).

[pocket-rocket]

Originally Posted by Sevensecondsuv

The cranks would be the same except your's has smaller main bearing journals (which are actually stronger).

That is about backward thinking to me. I would have thought it was the larger journal cranks that would have been stronger. Thank you for posting this, I was going to get a large journal crank/block when I got ready to do a 2.3t

[Sevensecondsuv]

Originally Posted by pocket-rocket

That is about backward thinking to me. I would have thought it was the larger journal cranks that would have been stronger. Thank you for posting this, I was going to get a large journal crank/block when I got ready to do a 2.3t

Well I don't have any tests to prove that statement. But there has been a few issues with the large bearing cranks, but you never hear of any with the small bearing cranks. Either way the biggest determining factor is whether or not you want to run DIS ignition (which is in itself dictated by what head you want to run, dual plug or single), as that needs a small-journal block to mount the crank trigger.

[scotts90ranger]

Originally Posted by Sevensecondsuv

Either way the biggest determining factor is whether or not you want to run DIS ignition (which is in itself dictated by what head you want to run, dual plug or single), as that needs a small-journal block to mount the crank trigger.

to be a bolt on, yes, but not necessarily true, a large journal block is just 3 tapped holes away from having a crank sensor...

[Sevensecondsuv]

Originally Posted by scotts90ranger

to be a bolt on, yes, but not necessarily true, a large journal block is just 3 tapped holes away from having a crank sensor...

Yeah, but it's much easier to tap an inaccurate hole for an oil drain in a ranger block than it is to tap 3 precisely located holes in a turbo block for the crank trigger. Your base timing depends on your accuracy with the holes.

And yes, 93-97 2.3's had factory shorty headers. They're very nice parts. To verify your axle gear ratio, look up the "axle" code on the vehicle identification sticker on the jamb part of the driver's door and match it up with list of codes found in the tech library here at TRS.