2.3L ('83-'97) NA performance upgrades that will benefit a turbocharged engine?

[Roert42]

For a booster engine you would want a forged bottom end with dished pistons and a cam setup for the psi and turbo size you want to run. All paired together. Lower the CR so you can run higher boost.

For a NA build you would try and raise the CR with convex pistons, stroker, ect.

 

[Blmpkn]

Rear end gearing would be different between an n/a and a turbo application as well, ideally.

Load builds boost, so you'd want a gear set a step or two higher (numerically lower) than you would if it was gonna be all motor.

 

[scotts90ranger]

It's all in what YOU want to do, I'm pretty sure being in the 200-250hp range is going to be more driveable than 300hp up, in the rpm range a Lima is happiest running you have to build boost and that much boost will take time to get to...

Don't take Bobby wrong, he means well , knows his stuff and can envision a way to the end goal, just might not be what you envisioned to do the job... There's several ways my junk can be better but it's been good enough for a long time, it'll get slightly tweaked over the years but I'll probably keep it about like it is...

Me I didn't want to reinvent the wheel and got into the turbo 2.3L thing kinda late, there's been no turbo Lima out there since 1988, that's 34 years ago... parts are getting aged and beat to death or hoarded in a corner somewhere... I have enough spare parts to build another engine (never know when something dumb is going to happen like the rod I broke several years ago) short of pistons likely, have a couple spare computers for when this one dies if I don't go aftermarket by then... my build is a cobbled together mess, good intentions but every time I think about cleaning it up something else comes up...

The one thing that really wouldn't be the same between a N/A power build and a turbo power build would be the cam, you want a lower rpm cam for a turbo build which is why people run the stock Ranger roller cam in them since the torque peak is like 2600...

If I were to go about building another turbo engine with 300hp as a goal, I wouldn't bother starting with a turbo block, start with a '88 or newer block to get the smaller main bearings, put on some new forged pistons slated for about 8.5:1 to 9:1 compression ratio, not sure on head, single plug are less prone to cracks. I would use some modern fuel injectors and aftermarket computer, would stick with DIS cuz it's simple and go from there... this would take a somewhat large turbo to get to that power and premium only...

Then on Bobby's side a bone stock 5.3L is already making around 300hp and will run great but takes some transmission changes and more wiring...

 

[bobbywalter]

All true. If based on old tech.

Especially for a typical carb application.

As always use and intended goal is a large factor.

But it is a new day.

With a goal of 300 to 350 hp..street use is how I took this as the operation....

.......forged stuff is not necessarily needed here. Maybe some ring gap and fresh bearings while your in there and some studs


There are a half dozen or so manifolds that can work...why you don't use them is beyond me.....maybe I misunderstood your reasoning....due to the hvac and fitment...

I am not trolling.....you wanting 300 hp and an a4ld. ...that seems like trolling

You said you couldn't find a manifold that worked ..if you remember the early fox turbo setups, then buying a 180 degree mandrel pipe....sch 40....and having an exhaust shop weld it to your goal is cost effective....And easy to strap. Though there are many turbo rangers using tubulars and retaining ac. For your situation...it don't work.??



in the mid 2000s. There was a kid that had a 2.3 based build with 1000 hp capacity in a fox....and what is old school now..... mega squirt.....no stock engine parts....but it was something I would have never thought possible until it was prowling around U of M and Milan....and... uhhhh other impromptu events.

What made that possible was megasquirt... stacked....and 12 injectors available when needed...



Your engine...being what it is, With this current MS3 stuff, can develop 300 ish ...easily with some boost and even with high compression.


The old rules do not necessarily apply.

The limits of the older technology are a choice.




I have seen this car in person....it's ridiculously awesome. At one point it was using ms3.

Of course it's a full custom parts with only the idea of lima as it's base....

But the point is the cost effective tuning.

there are a ton of lima and cyclone cars down there.... Running boost and high compression.

...the capacity of these 4 and 6 cylinder cars turned me on to the MS3.

 

[bobbywalter]

Rear end gearing would be different between an n/a and a turbo application as well, ideally.

Load builds boost, so you'd want a gear set a step or two higher (numerically lower) than you would if it was gonna be all motor.

Really?


My 250 and 150 have the same height tires....same gears....same towing capacity.


One is turbo ..one is a N/A big block.

One runs 13s stock and can achieve 23 mpg city if driven with that goal.

The other can barely crack 12 mpg driving 55 mph.

Both...in relatives are high compression engines.

 

[JoshT]

Thanks for the further replies. Looks like we might be moving past he headbutting phase Bobby. These replies seem to be moving a little more in the direction I was looking for, also I'm still studying everything I can find elsewhere and fleshing out my plans.

I'm at work on my cellphone which makes replying to a bunch of posts kind of difficult. Might try to respond to some, but it'll be easier on the computer at home.

 

[bobbywalter]

Definitely not trolling brother. And only trying to help.

 

[JoshT]

I would like to point out that an engine was hat I’d optimized for NA setup will be sub par for forced induction and vise Versa.

So, most mods done to the engine would be wasted. Better to set it up for forced in diction from the start. Much more time efficient.


You can boost an engine that is setup for NA power, and make more power. But you would make more power setting up the engine for boost and boosting it.
If you build and engine for boost, the run it NA, you will not gain much.

Figure out where you want to be at the end, then work towards that. Don’t go half way in one direction then have to turn around and start over again.

Understand that, I'm not looking for optimized NA, just improved NA. That's why I'm asking about things that will be effective for both, so that I can focus my spending in those areas for the time being. Not saying I won't buy a NA performance parts, but I'd rather go cheap on the NA related stuff and quality on the thing that will benefit turbo. Not sure if that makes any sense at all the way I said it.

There are things that will benefit both. A few examples, upgrading from solid rockers to roller rockers. Porting head and intake. Improved tuning capabilities benefit both. More free flowing exhaust and larger injectors may not make a difference now, but they will support more power in the future.

I know you can push about 7 or 8 PSI on a NA bottom end and it will last for a little while if you aren't hard in it. I may actually do that for a bit when I get ready to turbo, but itll be more of an experiment to see how long it lasts. Before doing that I would already have a new bottom end in the works. I said I don't want to go into the bottom end at this time, but I'm already putting together a wishlist for building a better one.

 

[JoshT]

For a booster engine you would want a forged bottom end with dished pistons and a cam setup for the psi and turbo size you want to run. All paired together. Lower the CR so you can run higher boost.

For a NA build you would try and raise the CR with convex pistons, stroker, ect.

Definitely as mentioned above that's already in the plans. Let's call it a branch project that will be merged in later.

I know I would need to raise CR to really build power with NA. Either domed pistons or milling the head. Wouldn't really be able to reuse the pistons with the turbo, and milling the head is a step in the wrong direction. I'm willing to sacrifice that power potential.

If I have to go into it before I'm ready to turbo I might drop a few bucks on improvements, but I'll be keeping it as budget as I can knowing it'll be replaced. More likely I'd swap in a junkyard short block and use mine to build the turbo block.

Now if I pull the head for porting, valve work, or head gasket (I hope not) then I might go back with a thinner cometic MLS head gasket for a minor bump.

 

[JoshT]

Rear end gearing would be different between an n/a and a turbo application as well, ideally.

Load builds boost, so you'd want a gear set a step or two higher (numerically lower) than you would if it was gonna be all motor.

Gearing is going to need to be addressed regardless. Overall gear ratio needs to be matched to the engines power band. My tire size is fixed, my transmission gearing is fixed. The only place left to adjust is axle gear ratio. I'm not going to invest in that until I know where I end up with the engine. Might be getting things out of order but regearing the axle will be about the last step of this build.

The gearing for now is fixed at 3.45 and 3.73. that is because the current (stock?) axle is 3.45. I'll be lowering the truck with an Explorer 8.8 that is geared 3.73 ls. I've got all the parts for lowering, but I don't know when I'm actually going to get around to it.

 

[scotts90ranger]

One of the ebay tube turbo manifolds that move the turbo forward would let you keep A/C, that's their point...

The only stock part that wouldn't like being turbo'd is the stock cast pistons, the rods and crank are the same either way (and in Ford fashion, overbuilt... they like to overbuild bottom ends but skimp on other random stuff), the cheapest forged pistons out there are circle track stuff but they don't recommend them for forced induction for whatever reason... been a few years since I've looked into that though...

 

[JoshT]

Wow I was actually able to get through the firewall at work. That doesn't usually happen.

It's all in what YOU want to do, I'm pretty sure being in the 200-250hp range is going to be more driveable than 300hp up, in the rpm range a Lima is happiest running you have to build boost and that much boost will take time to get to...

Don't take Bobby wrong, he means well , knows his stuff and can envision a way to the end goal, just might not be what you envisioned to do the job... There's several ways my junk can be better but it's been good enough for a long time, it'll get slightly tweaked over the years but I'll probably keep it about like it is...

Me I didn't want to reinvent the wheel and got into the turbo 2.3L thing kinda late, there's been no turbo Lima out there since 1988, that's 34 years ago... parts are getting aged and beat to death or hoarded in a corner somewhere... I have enough spare parts to build another engine (never know when something dumb is going to happen like the rod I broke several years ago) short of pistons likely, have a couple spare computers for when this one dies if I don't go aftermarket by then... my build is a cobbled together mess, good intentions but every time I think about cleaning it up something else comes up...

The one thing that really wouldn't be the same between a N/A power build and a turbo power build would be the cam, you want a lower rpm cam for a turbo build which is why people run the stock Ranger roller cam in them since the torque peak is like 2600...

If I were to go about building another turbo engine with 300hp as a goal, I wouldn't bother starting with a turbo block, start with a '88 or newer block to get the smaller main bearings, put on some new forged pistons slated for about 8.5:1 to 9:1 compression ratio, not sure on head, single plug are less prone to cracks. I would use some modern fuel injectors and aftermarket computer, would stick with DIS cuz it's simple and go from there... this would take a somewhat large turbo to get to that power and premium only...

Then on Bobby's side a bone stock 5.3L is already making around 300hp and will run great but takes some transmission changes and more wiring...

I'm not saying that I'm going to take my truck to 300 or 350 HP, I'm saying that that it a number I've got set in my head for planning a build. There is definitely a difference in drivability with that kind of horsepower between a lowered truck on small tires, and a lifted 4x4 truck with larger tires. My build will be the former and I can't imagine having more power than that and still enjoying the drivability.

All that said I don't actually expect to reach that power level. If I wanted to build 1000 hp would I buy pistons or build on a block that can only handle 500? No, but I can build a 500 hp engine out of 1000 hp components no problem. It might be expensive as hell, but it'll take the abuse all day long. Granted that doesn't apply to everything like turbo selection, injectors, or camshaft that need to be matched to the intended power level. It's easier to make less with more, than to make more with less. Realistically I'll probably call it quits around the 200-250 hp level, but it would be nice knowing that I've got a little more available if I chose to go there.

Not saying your build is junk, just that I'm not going about it quite the same way. For starters I'm not starting with a turbo engine, I'm going to roll my own. In large part for exactly the reason that you describe. The newest is 30+ years old, and parts are getting hard to come by. NA blocks were made into the late 90s/ or early 2000s, internals can still be bought new. I'm not going stock on computer, but more on that in a later post. I wouldn't trust the old wiring enough to drop money on it, but I'll use my existing harness for the time being.

A ranger roller cam would still be an improvement over the stock slider cam. If I upgraded to a performance roller cam now, I'd already have the rollers in place for a turbo roller cam later.

The plan for the turbo phase of the build is to start with a different block. Reuse the crank, upgrade rods and pistons straight off. Not sure which block I'll use they've all got good points and bad, but the block isn't the Lima's weak point anyway. Maybe go with a 2.5L block and have a bit of a stroker if I can find the pistons, that would force the move to distributor-less ignition which might happen anyway. Still trying to puzzle out the answer on the head myself.

 

[scotts90ranger]

I was calling my build cobbled, cuz I know it is, I assembled it in 2 months on a low budget buying rock auto rings, bearings and seals, reused the best 4 pistons I had on hand in the block I could pull out of the crate easiest... I did what I knew would work

If I'd started differently in 2009 I would have been better off, but I found what I did...

Blocks don't matter, in '86 they changed to a different oil pan gasket setup, I think '88 they changed to smaller main bearings (less restriction, just as strong), '89 minor changes to mount the crank sensor up front, '95 they got rid of the distributor holes and the oil pump is directly behind the aux pulley, it stayed the same through mid '01 when the Lima's ended. The 2.5L just made for different crank, rod and pistons, as far as I've heard the crank is fine, the rods are powdered metal and apparently not as beefy as the older engines (all rods on 2.3L and 2.0L lima's are the same turbo or not) and the pistons are hypereutectic and not as durable. The problem with the 2.5L is there isn't any aftermarket for rods and pistons unless something showed up in the last few years...

 

[JoshT]

All true. If based on old tech.

Especially for a typical carb application.

As always use and intended goal is a large factor.

But it is a new day.

With a goal of 300 to 350 hp..street use is how I took this as the operation....

.......forged stuff is not necessarily needed here. Maybe some ring gap and fresh bearings while your in there and some studs


There are a half dozen or so manifolds that can work...why you don't use them is beyond me.....maybe I misunderstood your reasoning....due to the hvac and fitment...

I am not trolling.....you wanting 300 hp and an a4ld. ...that seems like trolling

You said you couldn't find a manifold that worked ..if you remember the early fox turbo setups, then buying a 180 degree mandrel pipe....sch 40....and having an exhaust shop weld it to your goal is cost effective....And easy to strap. Though there are many turbo rangers using tubulars and retaining ac. For your situation...it don't work.??



in the mid 2000s. There was a kid that had a 2.3 based build with 1000 hp capacity in a fox....and what is old school now..... mega squirt.....no stock engine parts....but it was something I would have never thought possible until it was prowling around U of M and Milan....and... uhhhh other impromptu events.

What made that possible was megasquirt... stacked....and 12 injectors available when needed...



Your engine...being what it is, With this current MS3 stuff, can develop 300 ish ...easily with some boost and even with high compression.


The old rules do not necessarily apply.

The limits of the older technology are a choice.




I have seen this car in person....it's ridiculously awesome. At one point it was using ms3.

Of course it's a full custom parts with only the idea of lima as it's base....

But the point is the cost effective tuning.

there are a ton of lima and cyclone cars down there.... Running boost and high compression.

...the capacity of these 4 and 6 cylinder cars turned me on to the MS3.

Primarily street use is correct. Maybe an occasional run at the local drag strip, but probably not since I haven't been in the last 20+ years. If I can find one that will let me join in, I wouldn't mind taking it to a track day at a road course. Last I checked the local road course didn't allow trucks. Maybe throw it around some cones at a autocross event. Not trying to be competitive at any of them, just to have some fun.

I may throw boost at the stock NA block at some point just to see how long it lasts. Needed or not, a forged bottom end will be on the way for the actual turbo build.

As for the turbo manifold issues. The conversions I have seen using a turbo in the stock 2.3t location interferes with the AC plenum. Either the plenum needs to be notched to clear the down pipe similar to what one would do for the valve covers in a V8 swap, or the heat from the turbo and down pipe ends up burning a hole in the box. This may not have been an issue with Scott's build and may not be an issue with the heater only boxes, but it is a pretty common theme I have seen when researching putting the turbo engines in them. Previously I also thought that turbo location would also interfere with the Ranger's location for the AC compressor, but that actually does not appear to be the case.

Talking about manifolds that do fit, you are correct there are several manifolds that will work. They just don't work as I want them to in stock form. I think I have found a solution for that. I can use a stock style turbo manifold, flip it around so the outlet is forward and up instead of aft and down. I'll need adapters to keep the ports lined up with the head, but they are available.

Stock thanks to Scott's pictures:

Flipped location using stock same manifold and flipped with adapters from Big R Motorsports:

I could also used the same adapters with a center mount tubular header from E-bay to place it so that the cold section is closer to where the hot section is in the picture above. Biggest drawback is that those headers are apparently very prone to cracking.

I had ideas on how to make it work like I wanted. I was asking to see what people who have done the swap used, and to find out how it fit and worked out for them. Perhaps I did not explain that clearly enough in the other thread.

For the ECU, I said I was weighing the options. I wasn't saying that I am not open to using megasquirt, just that I wasn't ready to comit to using it. I've done a bunch of reading and studying over the last few days. You'll be happy to know that I am not longer considering using Quarterhorse to tune the EEC-IV. That said, I'm also going to say that I will not be using MegaSquirt or MicroSquirt ECU on this either. More on that in a future post.

 

[JoshT]

I was calling my build cobbled, cuz I know it is, I assembled it in 2 months on a low budget buying rock auto rings, bearings and seals, reused the best 4 pistons I had on hand in the block I could pull out of the crate easiest... I did what I knew would work

If I'd started differently in 2009 I would have been better off, but I found what I did...

Blocks don't matter, in '86 they changed to a different oil pan gasket setup, I think '88 they changed to smaller main bearings (less restriction, just as strong), '89 minor changes to mount the crank sensor up front, '95 they got rid of the distributor holes and the oil pump is directly behind the aux pulley, it stayed the same through mid '01 when the Lima's ended. The 2.5L just made for different crank, rod and pistons, as far as I've heard the crank is fine, the rods are powdered metal and apparently not as beefy as the older engines (all rods on 2.3L and 2.0L lima's are the same turbo or not) and the pistons are hypereutectic and not as durable. The problem with the 2.5L is there isn't any aftermarket for rods and pistons unless something showed up in the last few years...

I'm aware of most of the differences I think.

Blocks do matter to an extent, but you hit on the main two being journal size and distributor provision. Turbo blocks had a drilled and tapped oil return boss. Some NA blocks had the boss that can be drilled and tapped, but I'll probably run return into the oil pan. Allegedly the small journal blocks are stronger, but I wonder if the smaller crank journal is weaker as a trade off. I doubt the strength of either would ever be an issue for me. The later oil pump setup could be advantageous. The most common oil pump failure seems to be a sheared distributor drive gear. This later oil pump style ditches the drive gear issues, removes the aux shaft, and I'm thinking that the oil pump could be changed without dropping the pan.

I'm mostly interested in the newer blocks for availability and lower miles. I do intend to go distributor-less and coil near plug eventually. If I do so before the turbo I could use any block. If not I'll need the distributor hole. I'm leaning towards an 94 or older engine to keep backwards compatability. The small journal 89-94 blocks fit this criteria best, are the ones I'm most likely to find available locally, and will probably have fewer miles than anything older.

The 2.5's stay in mind because the are the newest version of the engine. Also because the internals will fit right into in a 2.3 block to create a cheap stroker kit for earlier 2.3Ls with a distributor. I have seen stronger rods available for the 2.5L. I've seen forged flat top pistons for the 2.5L. I haven't found turbo pistons for the 2.5L yet, but I have seen references to them when browsing the Lima boards and forums. Probably custom pistons. Not really worth the added expense for a turbo motor, the 2.3L will be more than enough.