95 96 97 2.3 to 98-up 2.5 Engine Swap

[flybeech]

I've got a very high mileage 1996 Ranger 2.3 MT5. It pretty much runs perfect and I use it regularly for very long trips. It uses a quart every 3000 miles. There is no need to do anything to the truck, but I would like to have a little more punch.

From the various older threads I've seen, it appears the 98-up 2.5 long block, from the oil pan to the cam cover is a drop-in the 95 through 97 models. Solid 2.5 engines are still around cheap and I'm thinking of getting a clean, used 98-up long-block to build while using my truck and dropping it right on in my '96, on a weekend.

My understanding is the oil pan on the '98 model will fit the 97-down frames, without modification, but perhaps looks a little goofy. Can anyone verify? I would prefer to retain the 97-down oil pan,screen and indicator, just to keep it as '96 as possible, but read here that the oil pump doesn't interchange, among other factors. Unknown is if the 2.5 crank, rods and pistons will just drop-in my original 2.3 block.

Am I correct to assume the 98-up 2.5L long-block, stripped of everything, except the oil pan, will drop right in to the 1995 - 1997 Rangers, originally equipped with the 2.3 engine?

 

[RonD]

Welcome to TRS

The 2.5l SOHC Lima engine was the last version of that model, made in Fords Lima, Ohio plant, hence Lima engine, also called Pinto engine because it was first used in 1976 Ford Pinto
There were 3 models, 2.0l SOHC(under-bored 2.3l block), 2.3l SOHC, and the stroked 2.3l for 2.5l SOHC.
Used from 1976 to 2001.5, mid year 2001 Rangers got the 2.3l DOHC Duratec 4-cyl engines.

Yes, in 1995 Ford changed all Rangers over to the new EEC-V computer, ODB2, and the Limas all got a new Crank sensor type, so 1994 and older Limas can't be used in 1995 and up without changing computer and harness, or visa versa.

In 1998 Ford changed to a Returnless fuel system, it runs at 60psi pressure
1997 and earlier EFI ran return line and 30psi pressure

1998 is also first year of 3rd generation Rangers so there were changes in frame and body, not alot, but oil pan fit could be an issue, not sure


Have you considered, just making your 2.3l better, rebuild with some extras
While "there is no replacement for displacement" the .2 liters isn't alot, and the devil you know is usually better than the devil you don't know.

Quite a few options for the 2.3l since it was also used in Mustangs, and Mustang owners liked power modifications
Money spent on performance parts might be better than money spent on "making it fit" with different model engine

Good read here on some options: http://www.therangerstation.com/forums/showthread.php?t=154831

 

[flybeech]

Welcome to TRS

The 2.5l SOHC Lima engine was the last version of that model, made in Fords Lima, Ohio plant, hence Lima engine, also called Pinto engine because it was first used in 1976 Ford Pinto
There were 3 models, 2.0l SOHC(under-bored 2.3l block), 2.3l SOHC, and the stroked 2.3l for 2.5l SOHC.
Used from 1976 to 2001.5, mid year 2001 Rangers got the 2.3l DOHC Duratec 4-cyl engines.

Yes, in 1995 Ford changed all Rangers over to the new EEC-V computer, ODB2, and the Limas all got a new Crank sensor type, so 1994 and older Limas can't be used in 1995 and up without changing computer and harness, or visa versa.

In 1998 Ford changed to a Returnless fuel system, it runs at 60psi pressure
1997 and earlier EFI ran return line and 30psi pressure

1998 is also first year of 3rd generation Rangers so there were changes in frame and body, not alot, but oil pan fit could be an issue, not sure


Have you considered, just making your 2.3l better, rebuild with some extras
While "there is no replacement for displacement" the .2 liters isn't alot, and the devil you know is usually better than the devil you don't know.

Quite a few options for the 2.3l since it was also used in Mustangs, and Mustang owners liked power modifications
Money spent on performance parts might be better than money spent on "making it fit" with different model engine

Good read here on some options: http://www.therangerstation.com/forums/showthread.php?t=154831

It really doesn't need anything. I'm a retired aircraft mechanic and have done aircraft-style cylinder bore-scope inspection and leak down compression tests, which were all good. I have thought strongly of an overhaul, but it can't be down, more than a day or two, so I wanted an engine built and waiting for a weekend swap. A clean, standard 2.5 core costs about the same and 200cc's more should give a little more grunt, while still maintaining the superb drivability and closed IM monitors, I enjoy now.

From what I can tell, everything on my 1996 will mate just fine to a 2.5 long-block, with the exception of the oil pan. It was reported on this forum under another thread that the 2.5 will install, with the newer-style oil sump. If all my assumptions are correct, the switch to a 2.5 seems to be an easy one, even if it only yields another 200cc's. The oil pan is my main concern.

 

[tinman_72]

I have a '98 2.5 in my '93. I used the '98 oil pan. No problem.

 

[scotts90ranger]

The oil pump moved to the auxiliary shaft in '96 and stayed there until the end of the Lima engine so you are good there even if the pan didn't fit in the truck. Your '96 should be interchangeable with the 2.5L, I would just keep your stock intake manifold and everything and just drop in a long block...

 

[flybeech]

I have a '98 2.5 in my '93. I used the '98 oil pan. No problem.

I referenced your posts from way back. It was my understanding that you had no problems using the 2.5 oil pan. Did you lose any ground clearance? I sure like the idea of building out a 2.5L long-block from the pan to the 1996 valve cover, from a nice, standard block and crank and swapping out the L/B in a day, using all of my 1996 toppings. I can probably find a clean long-block I can install and use as-is, but just sitting on the stand is pretty hard not to freshen-up, with some rings, bearings and exhaust valves, at least.

Just a little more grunt is all I need. Is the extra 200cc's noticeable?