2.3 into a BII.. Am I crazy?

[Beanmachine7000]

So, I'm still in the planning stages of my BII build up, and I'm looking for a motor swap candidate still... Well, me and my dad were discussing about how much we love Ford's Lima engines, and he suggested I put a 2.3 in the BII... Now, I hadn't seriously considered it until now, but I think if it would power a Ranger, it shouldn't have any problem with a BII now should it? I absolutely loved the 2.3 in my 90 Ranger, and I love the 2.5 in my new Ranger... Am I crazy?

 

[Hahnsb2]

Meh, the 2.3 is underpowered in a ranger and the 2.9 is underpowered in a B2 IMHO. I doubt you would get much better mileage either, my old 2.9 when it was stock could get equal mileage as my dads 4x4 2.3 ranger, smaller the engine the more weight will effect the gas mileage. The 2.3 is a much more bullet proof engine than the 2.9 however. IMHO the 4.0 swap is still the way to go.

 

[Beanmachine7000]

Oh, I wouldn't say underpowered... Maybe weak, but the darn things run forever... My dad put his first 2.3 well into 300k, and I still see it running around town today, my first 2.3 easily went to 250k, it's still working hard today, and my 2.5 is at 188k... Only thing we did to any of them was normal maintenance items... My 2.9 died at 177k Didn't they put 2.3's into the BII from the factory?

 

[Hahnsb2]

No, B2s only got 2.8s and 2.9 and supposedly on very rare occasions a diesel.
Yeah, the 2.3s are bullet proof but your mileage isn't going to be as great as you'd expect and it's going to be slow.

 

[Beanmachine7000]

Haha, speaking of those diesels, I found one of the turbo Mitubishi's close enough I'd drive to get it, but it has a bad injector pump Well, mileage really isn't that big a deal to me... I guess I'm just looking for something a little different to do...

 

[Totalled]

Yes, you are. A BII weighs at least 500 lbs more than a ranger and will be a slug. Not enough available torque.

 

[86ford]

if you want to be different swap in a 4.6, 5.4, 4.9, turbo 2.3, super coupe motor.

not a single one would be easy, but it would be different.

86

 

[Spartan]

Supercoups were 3.8 supercharged V6 engines.

Throw a 2.3 turbo out of a 83-88 thunderbird Turbo coupe, an SVO Mustang, or a Merkur XR4TI. plenty of power....on a stock LA3 computer it will handle 300 hp easy. plenty to move a bronco 2.

 

[fordmandan87]

if you regear the vehicle you can run with the 2.3 with little issues

 

[rusty ol ranger]

Id stick with the 2.9.

A 2.9 with 4.10's will do baout anything you want it to do.

later,
Dustin

 

[Beanmachine7000]

Id stick with the 2.9.

A 2.9 with 4.10's will do baout anything you want it to do.

later,
Dustin

I would too, but my 2.9 is sitting in the yard... Whatever I put in is going to be either more reliable, or more powerful, or both... 4.0=more power, 2.3=more reliable... I think the 4.9 would be neat, but waaayy too much work...

 

[country0001]

Thought about doing this myself. Mainly cause I have one in stock. I think it would be nifty, especially if u got it to perform like a 2.9 or better.

 

[bobbywalter]

why do i remember b2's having 4 cyl engines? they didnt have the 2.0 but the 2.3 1 bbl...then the diesel option in 85 iirc...the diesel the 2.3 and the 2.8 were options a few years...had 3 engine choice then it was 2.3-2.9 then 2.9 only...


i had an x truck that was gifted to trenton schools too that was a plow truck. 4.0 equipped...but a non production test truck. had to be sold in parts not whole.


put the axles in my truck. and the rest on many others.


there has to be someone round here with a 4 cyl truck...

 

[rusty ol ranger]

I would too, but my 2.9 is sitting in the yard... Whatever I put in is going to be either more reliable, or more powerful, or both... 4.0=more power, 2.3=more reliable... I think the 4.9 would be neat, but waaayy too much work...

How is the 2.9 less reliable then a 2.3L?....and there not that much weaker then a 4.0. There a good comprimise.

Actually the 300 (4.9L) swap isnt that big of deal if you put on like a 3 inch body lift.

Some here will try to steer you away from that swap, but with the body lift its no harder then a 302, and the 300 is better at performing truck duties then a 302. Its also as reliable as the earths rotation.

later,
Dustin

 

[Sevensecondsuv]

...the 300 is...also as reliable as the earths rotation.

later,
Dustin

Much like a 2.3.

Before mine was turbo'd, it wasn't underpowered in the least. It would move the ranger just as fast as the 4.0 moves my explorer. The BII is much closer in weight to a ranger. I see no reason why it couldn't move a BII. Ford was putting them in extended cab ranger's which can't be any lighter than a BII. I say go for it. Make sure you've got 3.73 or 4.10 gear axles and it'll be fine. And you won't have to worry about cracked heads and loss of oil pressure problems associated with the 2.9L POS engine.