"Hot Cam" mod


adsm08

Well-known member
Supporting Member
Ford Technician
TRS 20th Anniversary
Joined
Sep 20, 2009
Messages
31,654
Reaction score
1,032
Points
113
Location
Dillsburg PA
Vehicle Year
1987
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
4.0 V6
Engine Size
4.0
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Tire Size
31X10.50X15
So I picked up a 92 Mustang, 2.3 5-speed, a few weeks ago. It's mostly supposed to be the wife's DD for a while, since it about doubles the MPG of the Expedition, and stops me from hearing about how she misses driving stick.

But me being me I can't leave anything alone and want some more power. Her being her, she wants to work on her new car. I know the 2.3L will never be the power house a 4.0 or 5.0 will be, without a turbo at least, I want to squeeze a tad bit more out of it. I actually feel like it needs more bottom end, because she goes good, but I stall it more than I'd like.

I've been looking around at power upgrades for this engine, and this one caught my eye, because it seems like a good, simple, place to start and might just make a noticeable difference.

I found an article about doing some mix'n'match on the came and rollers and just wanted to see if anyone here had seen or done this before.
http://www.route66hotrodhigh.com/2300Cams.html

The hot setup is to use a 95+ Rocker Arm (1.86" ratio) with a 89-94 Roller Cam (0.2381" lobe lift). This will give you a valve lift of 0.443" which is pretty dam hot! If you have an 89-94 2.3L, you will have to widen the valve stem ends (0.2750") of the 95+ rockers to fit the 0.343" valve stems.

If you have a 95+ (94+ in Calif) 2.3L engine, it may not be just as easy to replace your cam with a 89-94 roller cam as the 95+ cam has a position sensor. Maybe someone with a picture of the 95+ cam can send one in so we can check the differences?

I had a chance to hit the wreckers and picked up a set of eight 1997 rockers for $16! I've just measured the rockers and they have a clearance of 0.010" (measured 0.285") over the valve stem (0.275"). It looks like you need to widen them to 0.343" to fit the 94 and earlier engines. 0.343" - 0.285" = 0.058" overall which is 0.029" each side.

I did some calculations and figured that changing to the higher ratio rockers will increase the duration of the intake and exhaust by 4 degree overall (2 degrees for the rise and 2 for the fall). The overlap will decrease proportionally by 4 degrees. Putting the new cam specs into DynoSim (engine simulator), it comes out to about 12 hp increase at 4500 rpm and 10 ftlb of torque. Can't wait to find the time to swap in the higher ratio rockers!

I checked with the local Ford parts counter to see if the camshaft sprocket gear (timing gear), the lifters and the heads had the same part number and they did. That means that they are the same part for all years: 1989 - 2000. This should be a simple bolt-in upgrade. The nice thing about the roller cam is that it just doesn't wear. Junkyard cams and rocker arms look like new after 100,000 miles and cost little!
Note: With any cam/lifter upgrade, you should check for piston to valve clearance and for valve spring bind at full lift. I don't expect any clearance problems but it is always good to check.
 


Rock Auto 5% Discount Code: 248EE46702D889 Expires: October 1, 2019

Fredness

New member
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Sasquatch Country!
Vehicle Year
1998
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
4.0L SOHC
Transmission
Automatic
Thread Necro!!!

OK, I have 3 2.3L heads:
1989 slider cam D-Port (Mustang)
1994 Roller cam D-Port 8 Plug (Ranger)
1995 Roller cam D-Port 8 Plug (Ranger)

I bought a 1998 Ranger 2.3L follower (for the 7mm valves) because I was going to do this on my '89 'Stang.
Figured I'd do 1998 valves, 1998 bronze valve guides and skip the whole grinding a follower tip to fit deal.
It arrived yesterday.

All I'll say is, there is NO information on this for a reason.
Someone needs to "cite their sources" as BOTH followers are the same physical dimensions (1.475" from adjuster socket center to roller and 1.050" from roller to tip), so I don't see how the ratio can be different.
 

BPLP

Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2018
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Location
Kalamazoo, Michigan
Vehicle Year
1996
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
2.3l 4 banger
Transmission
Manual
Wouldn't be the height of the followers that would be the concern? I'm well aware of this mod and I'm planning on going to the JY to pick up a 94 cam to put in my 96 2.3 which would give me that "hot cam" that is mentioned. When I do that I'll takes some calipers and measure the height of the roller the cam rides on. If I'm not mistaken that is what would make a bigger difference compared to the length of the followers unless I'm misunderstanding you.
 

BPLP

Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2018
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Location
Kalamazoo, Michigan
Vehicle Year
1996
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
2.3l 4 banger
Transmission
Manual
Also something to look into if you want to spend some extra coin, go to Esslinger Racing's website, they have all sorts of 2.3 parts including camshafts with over .500" lift and whatnot. Some over .600" lift too lol.
 

turbo91xlt

Member
RBV's on Boost
Joined
Dec 14, 2014
Messages
408
Reaction score
4
Points
18
Location
Goshen, NY
Vehicle Year
1991

1992
Make / Model
Ford
Transmission
Manual
That info has been around for years and has been proven multiple times to be complete BS.. Its amazing that site is still up after all these years. The ratio is unchanged between the early & late dual plug heads.
 


Top