How can I tell what engine I have?

[itlives]

The guy that sold it to me said it is a 2.3L out of an '85 Ranger.
After looking through the sticky, I see that in '85 it's supposed to be a 2.0. It has a one-bbl carb- which I can't have!
I'm looking for a better intake that will fit a round port head.

Are there numbers that will tell me what size it is? I've written down the numbers on the block (as close as I could- they are almost unreadable).
He said it ran good and I don't want to open it up to measure if it can be helped.

Thanks for any helps -Mike

 

[Mark_88]

When I saw the pic you posted I noticed the round intake ports and that the filler cap was at the rear of the valve cover...that looked to me like the 2.0 configuration...but in 85 I think they were all carbed and the D-port heads were covered in the sticky at the top of this forum...

Would have to have a look at it again to check though...but I'd say you may have a 2.0 for now...

EDIT: Just checked the sticky and could not tell from the literature whether it is a 2.0 or 2.3 because they both had O-port heads...in 85 they introduced EFI and if yours is carbed then it could be a 2.0 but they both still had O-ports...

Are you planning on taking the head off? If you do you can overlay the 2.3 head gasket and if there are no gaps around the piston holes then it is a 2.3...if there is about a 1/8" gap then the engine is a 2.0...

Other than that you might be able to check the block numbers but I don't know if we have an engine number checker on this site...maybe have to go go Ford for that...

 

[itlives]

Thanks again Mark. I see how you got your reputation. I was not planning on taking the head off - yet.
So, if I can find an intake with round ports, it wouldnt matter if it for a 2.0 or a 2.3?
Is the only difference the bore?
I need to find a low profile intake so it will fit the VW w/o cutting the bed.

 

[Mark_88]

LOL...most of that rep was for jokes...but I do help when I can...

The 2.3 and 2.0 are identical except the bore...but apparently you cannot overbore a 2.0 to a 2.3 due to the thickness of the cylinder walls...

I ran a 2.0 for several years and it was OK...it was only when I noticed a hole in #1 piston and an eventual meltdown that I swapped in a 2.3...there was very little difference in HP but the 2.3 is stronger and has better lower end...

Not sure about how this is going into the VW so not familiar with the clearance issues you are having...will this be a transverse mount? My Dad had a VW wagon similar to yours but it was a camper van...not sure if I ever saw inside the engine bay...

There is not much difference between FI and carbed intakes..but I know the FI are closer to the head than the one I have from the Mustang II...mine sticks out maybe 2 or 3" farther than some FI intakes but I was looking at Flamins intake and thought how I would like to gain that space...

We've also had a thread about removing the intake coolant lines that some have...and apparently this can be done without affecting performance or cooling...something to consider if you have limited space because routing that coolant line is a bit of a pita...even with the extra room...

 

[itlives]

I have all kinds of room EXCEPT on the height. A VW engine is horizontally opposed so when you take it and all cooling tins there's a huge hole. A buddy of mine has a Chevy V-6 in his but had to make a raised place to clear the carb.
I'm hoping I don't have to do that. I've done some measuring and it's close. If I get a low profile intake and don't have put and apter plate on it and use either a cold intake or low profile cleaner, I should be ok.
The engine sits backwards in the back. It doesn't need any thing on the engine but water pump and alternator. No fan or smog stuff or ac. That helps with power.
From what you said, the 2.3 is not the same block as a 2.0. The 2.3 sounds like what I'll eventually get for the low-end torque. I need it to pull that camper up in hilly
Arkansas/Oklahoma where I camp.
I also want to make a trip out to the west coast.
Fun fun! I just love a project!

 

[Mark_88]

The original 2.0 from the Pinto is not the same as the 2.0 from the Ranger...

The Ranger 2.0 and 2.3 are the same block and you can swap heads...that's what I did originally...put a 2.3 head on the Ranger 2.0...with a mild racing cam and the shorty header from a 93 Mazda 2300...

Most parts will interchange on them so I'm sure you can find something that works. the top of my carb with the breather removed sits almost level with the top of the valve cover...if you do a low profile cover of the carb with no filter and run an air intake to that it might work...but I would think you'd need at least 2" on top of the carb to do justice to the air flow...

I'm actually working on a similar project...moving the air filter off the top of the carb and using an intake from a fuel injected setup...this is primarily to provide an outlet for the valve cover vent that, under certain conditions, blows oil foam into the breather and gums it up...with a box type filter and air inlet I can run that valve cover air flow below the air filter and let the soggy mess drip out below...

If the engine you are using has any blow-by then this might help you also...I don't have anything confirmed on this yet other than the base plate...that will come from the breather that is on it now...just have to find the other parts and start putting it together.

 

[upnsmoke]

I have the same issue with blowby. I'm working on a catch can setup currently.

 

[itlives]

Ok, so I'm getting somewhere on the thinking (if not the doing) part.
Mark, when you say you used a 2.3 head on a 2.0 block, do you mean you just bolted it on?

Also, I am going to raise the ass end of the truck. That means when I build the engine mounts, I can lower the engine a couple of inches and still have the oil pan at a decent distance from the ground. That means I'm probably ok using the same kind of set-up you have.
I already have a shorty header.
Is the cam just a bolt-on thing -no machining necessary? If so, I'm doing it, too.

Does the Ranger 2.3 and 2.0 both have round intake ports and use the same intakes and exhaust?

Sorry for so many questions, I really appreciate the help.

 

[Mark_88]

No problem with the questions...

Yes, the heads are direct bolt-on...but try to stay withing a few years of each other in your case because in 89 the Rangers went to 8 plugs and the mustangs had 4 plugs up to 92 or so...but the mustang head from 91 had a roller cam...which means higher revs without valve float...

The 8 plug will work also, just a bit more work to fill in those extra holes unless you swap in the fuel injection and all the other stuff needed...

The cam is not just bolt on, but fairly easy to install...I wouldn't necessarily recommend a longer duration cam (keeps the valves open longer to allow more flow)...unless you are planning to do some work on the head to make it flow better also...this involves porting and polishing...not difficult to do but more time and money involved...I ported and polished my head with an electric drill and some grinding stones...

Do you know how many miles are on the engine? This would be a determining factor as to whether it would be worth your while doing anything like that as opposed to having the bottom end rebuilt...the 87 short block that I put in only had 140,000 km on the clock when I got it...probably could have been rebuilt but I took a chance...had the head rebuilt with new valves, valve seals, and the valve seats...

I shouldn't have an oil issue but I do...it burns oil and was blowing it all over the place...mostly through the valve cover that wasn't sealed properly but I still go through more oil than it should...and it's not like a rear main seal is leaking because there is no drip...and I redid the pan with an aluminum one from a mustang also...sealed it up good...still losing oil...

So I guess I'm trying to warn/advise you against going whole hog on upgrades without considering the bottom end rebuild unless you know the engine was rebuilt or has very low mileage and hasn't sat unused for several years...

 

[itlives]

Thanks for all the advice and general info. I guess it's time for a few trips to the pull-it places around town.

My plans are to use this engine as is. Once all the pipes and mounts are made it will easy peasy to switch out another built one.

Thanks again!

 

[Mark_88]

I have the same issue with blowby. I'm working on a catch can setup currently.

I think we discussed this in another thread...but I mentioned I tried a catch can and it didn't work out for me...but it was more or less a hose into a bottle...what got me on that was the fumes and smoke so I want to do something better.

If you look at the way the FI models route that VC hose into the air intake that's essentially what I want to do...but move the filter off the carb and route it to where the air filter box is on the passenger side fender...

My original air intake came from under the battery platform and up through a series of hoses...and this would be better than stuffing the hose into a bottle or even a contraption like the PCV cannister on the driver side. I was going that route till I realized that it just wouldn't keep all that foam out for long...I will post some pics if/when I get mine done...hopefully it will work...

Thanks for all the advice and general info. I guess it's time for a few trips to the pull-it places around town.

My plans are to use this engine as is. Once all the pipes and mounts are made it will easy peasy to switch out another built one.

Thanks again!

You're welcome again...have fun and definitely would love to see pics of the final version...or make a build thread since it is very unique application of this engine...to me anyway...

 

[upnsmoke]

I think we discussed this in another thread...but I mentioned I tried a catch can and it didn't work out for me...but it was more or less a hose into a bottle...what got me on that was the fumes and smoke so I want to do something better.

If you look at the way the FI models route that VC hose into the air intake that's essentially what I want to do...but move the filter off the carb and route it to where the air filter box is on the passenger side fender...

My original air intake came from under the battery platform and up through a series of hoses...and this would be better than stuffing the hose into a bottle or even a contraption like the PCV cannister on the driver side. I was going that route till I realized that it just wouldn't keep all that foam out for long...I will post some pics if/when I get mine done...hopefully it will work...

I came across that thread today. I think I can picture what you have planned. I don't see any reason it shouldn't work. I suppose I can see where you are coming from on the smoke and fumes, though I wonder sometimes if I have become somewhat immune to CO myself over the years, as pretty much every vehicle I have owned has ended up at least for some period of time with a cat-less exhaust that exited more or less directly below the passenger compartment. Currently my hose is just hanging behind the engine by the firewall with a rag rubber banded over the end. That is not the best idea, but it beats a soggy air filter. I'm going to put together a can with some baffles in it at some point.

Itlives, you could have a nice running piece with port work and a roller cam. That is what I would do if I had to start over with mine again. I just have a ported 2.0 head and an aftermarket hydraulic slider cam, and mine feels pretty healthy.

 

[itlives]

I hate to do it but I saw this yesterday and just HAVE to go look. Just got off the phone with him. I'm supposed to meet a 4. The block and head sound real good to me since I don't know the condition of mine. But, I'm mainly going to check out the intake (and prices of everything else).
http://shreveport.craigslist.org/pts/2815105429.html

If anyone sees this and wants to know what he has just put a reply in here.

 

[Mark_88]

Dang...that sounds too good to be true...a Ranger owners dream...I'd grab the head and short block just for the price...and a couple of intakes...

Actually, the scrap value alone on some of that stuff would pay for quite a bit of upgrades...auto cast is worth way more than shred steel...bring a trailer!

 

[itlives]

It looks like a great deal. It's a 1987 2.3 turbo, new head. I don't know the condition of the bottom end.
Can I just put higher compression pistons in the block and put a carb on the intake?
Will a carb work on a turbo intake?

He's got a crap load of parts. I offered him $250 and he accepted that. He said I'd have to take it all because he's tired of moving it around. I told him I'd have to reasearch it more.
Will my adapter plate fit on the '87 block?

That head looks awesome! The turbo won't work on my truck unless I cut the bed and make a box for it. I'm reluctant to do that.

My friend said he'd come look at it with me and see what he thinks.
Oh yeah, it's a d port head.