Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Performance, Engines & Troubleshooting > Other Ford Engines > 4 Cylinder Engines
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?


Welcome to Ford-Trucks Forums!
Welcome to Ford-Trucks.com.

You are currently viewing our forums as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Ford-Trucks Forums community today!





 
Reply
 
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old 12-04-2004, 09:17 PM
oldhalftons's Avatar
oldhalftons oldhalftons is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Spokane WA
Posts: 3,439
oldhalftons has a good reputation on FTE.oldhalftons has a good reputation on FTE.oldhalftons has a good reputation on FTE.
2.0 vs 2.3

How can you tell the difference between a 2.0 and a 2.3

Are intake and exhaust manifolds interchangable between 2.0 and 2.3?

Its time to start looking at the junkyards for a 4cyl for my 2wd 83 ranger
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-05-2004, 01:10 AM
fordman98 fordman98 is offline
New User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: southern california 4/now
Posts: 20
fordman98 is starting off with a positive reputation.
ranger motor huh

well Ive never heard of a 2.o motor in a ranger pick up, but the 2.3 liter is very common. I thaught that the 2.0 was used in cars like the tempo and topaz. I know that the ford focus uses a 2.o motor, and as far as them being interchangeable, Im not sure they are. I would guess not, but I wouldnt swear to it. as far as finding a motor for your 83 ranger pu, you can look in many directions. the mid 80's tbird sometimes used the 2.3 and if youre lucky you can find one with the turbo package. maybe the 2.9 v6 motor used in 80's rangers. you have many options, the newer 3.0 found in 90's and up rangers and the nicely powered 4.0. as long as you snag up the tranny. the 2.3 is the most common and shouldnt be too dificult to find.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-05-2004, 11:09 AM
oldhalftons's Avatar
oldhalftons oldhalftons is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Spokane WA
Posts: 3,439
oldhalftons has a good reputation on FTE.oldhalftons has a good reputation on FTE.oldhalftons has a good reputation on FTE.
the truck orginally came with a 2.0 acording to the VIN and emission sticker
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-05-2004, 10:39 PM
Dodge41 Dodge41 is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 117
Dodge41 is starting off with a positive reputation.
I believe the 2.0 engine your refering to may be the mazda 2.0. Prior to the ranger there were mazda b2000s, mazda b2200's and Ford couriers. The b2000 and b2200 had the same bodies as the couriers ( 2 body styels, they changed in 76/77. The mazdas and some couriers got the 2.0 engines, hints the name b2000, while some couriers got the 2.3, and the 2200 got disels. there were mazda b1800 and b1600 but those arent important right now. In 1982 ford pulled the plug on the project and started their own mini truck the ranger for 1983, while mazda continued the the trucks until 1984, then they redesigned them for 1986. But enough with the history lesson here.
If your engine seems to have a wide short vavle cover, then it is probably a mazda engine. As far an interchangibilty goes, the engines are of 2 diffrent designs so dont count on swapping stuff here. Example the 2.3 is and external belt driven ohc where as the 2.0 were chain driven. They used diffrent trannies, mazda had there series II i believe where as rangers got the borg warner.

Last edited by Dodge41; 12-05-2004 at 10:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-06-2004, 12:38 AM
oldhalftons's Avatar
oldhalftons oldhalftons is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Spokane WA
Posts: 3,439
oldhalftons has a good reputation on FTE.oldhalftons has a good reputation on FTE.oldhalftons has a good reputation on FTE.
no its not a mazda, its a ford belt driven cam 2.0

Are intake and exhaust manifolds interchangable between 2.0 and 2.3?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-06-2004, 12:56 AM
63redtudor 63redtudor is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 305
63redtudor is starting off with a positive reputation.
Are you sure that your ranger had a 2.0? The reason I ask is that the 2.0 you're talking about is an early pinto motor. It looks much like the 2.3, but if you pull the valve cover you'll see that the 2.0 has 3 cam supports while the 2.3 has 4. I know that there are a number of other differences, but I don't know what they are. Don't think that the manifolds will interchange, in fact, I'm not all that sure much will interchange between the motors, but I think that they have the same bell housing.
Edwin
__________________
1984 F150 4x4, 300, NP435, NP208

Denver, Colorado area
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-06-2004, 08:33 AM
tomw tomw is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: suburban atlanta
Posts: 4,115
tomw has a very good reputation on FTE.tomw has a very good reputation on FTE.tomw has a very good reputation on FTE.
Look up the VIN and find the displacement. FoMoCo made a 2.0 that looks exactly like the Lima 2.3(better gas mileage?). Smaller bore. Everything of the same vintage bolts up just fine. Heck, you could get a 2.5 and stuff it in there, and no one would be able to tell from the outside... It has a longer stroke. Cheap HP & torque upgrade without much installation hassle at all.
tom
__________________
It's not how hard you work, it's how much you get done. Simplificate and add lightness
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-06-2004, 10:11 AM
fordman98 fordman98 is offline
New User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: southern california 4/now
Posts: 20
fordman98 is starting off with a positive reputation.
2.0 talk

Im fiarly new to this whole FTE site, and Im amazed at what one can learn from just listining what others have to say. I was under the assumption that the pinto only had the 2.3, so thanks for the enlightenment. Oh, and I like the 2.5 idea...longer stroke=more power
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-06-2004, 02:10 PM
srod2 srod2 is offline
New User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1
srod2 is starting off with a positive reputation.
the 2.3 was used to power the tempo/topas 86/94 as well as the Ranger...
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-06-2004, 02:31 PM
oldhalftons's Avatar
oldhalftons oldhalftons is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Spokane WA
Posts: 3,439
oldhalftons has a good reputation on FTE.oldhalftons has a good reputation on FTE.oldhalftons has a good reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 63redtudor
It looks much like the 2.3, but if you pull the valve cover you'll see that the 2.0 has 3 cam supports while the 2.3 has 4.

Edwin
thanks I'll be looking for 2.3 today I'll look for 4 cam supports
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-06-2004, 02:50 PM
Dodge41 Dodge41 is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 117
Dodge41 is starting off with a positive reputation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge41
I believe the 2.0 engine your refering to may be the mazda 2.0. Prior to the ranger there were mazda b2000s, mazda b2200's and Ford couriers. The b2000 and b2200 had the same bodies as the couriers ( 2 body styels, they changed in 76/77. The mazdas and some couriers got the 2.0 engines, hints the name b2000, while some couriers got the 2.3, and the 2200 got disels. there were mazda b1800 and b1600 but those arent important right now. In 1982 ford pulled the plug on the project and started their own mini truck the ranger for 1983, while mazda continued the the trucks until 1984, then they redesigned them for 1986. But enough with the history lesson here.
If your engine seems to have a wide short vavle cover, then it is probably a mazda engine. As far an interchangibilty goes, the engines are of 2 diffrent designs so dont count on swapping stuff here. Example the 2.3 is and external belt driven ohc where as the 2.0 were chain driven. They used diffrent trannies, mazda had there series II i believe where as rangers got the borg warner.
Huh, this is odd. I posted the above message last night, but part of it is missing. I posted a link for the ranger station in the part that is missing and that was the important part of the post. Search "the ranger station" on google to get the link. That site has much info on engine swaps, interchange, ect.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-06-2004, 02:52 PM
oldhalftons's Avatar
oldhalftons oldhalftons is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Spokane WA
Posts: 3,439
oldhalftons has a good reputation on FTE.oldhalftons has a good reputation on FTE.oldhalftons has a good reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge41
Search "the ranger station" on google to get the link. That site has much info on engine swaps, interchange, ect.
I found the ranger station

thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-06-2004, 06:32 PM
canzus canzus is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 692
canzus is starting off with a positive reputation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by srod2
the 2.3 was used to power the tempo/topas 86/94 as well as the Ranger...
Not quite, the 2.3Tempo/Topaz is a push rod engine, it's a 200cid
6 cylinder with 2 of them removed, just about as bullit proof as the 6,
just less power...

SteveL
__________________
Steve & the Rockette
'63 F100
'68 F100
'72 Capri 2L
'73 Capri 2.6L V6
'73 MG B GT 2.6L V6(Ford)
'74 Capri 2L
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-07-2004, 07:59 AM
tomw tomw is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: suburban atlanta
Posts: 4,115
tomw has a very good reputation on FTE.tomw has a very good reputation on FTE.tomw has a very good reputation on FTE.
2.3 Tempo/Topaz was bullet proof, and also available in a larger size(2.5) if grabbed from one of the earliest Taurus cars. Even in a bull, the 2.5 pulled pretty well. You could even get it with a 5 speed stick. Saw one once, so they really exist..
tom
__________________
It's not how hard you work, it's how much you get done. Simplificate and add lightness
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-07-2004, 10:52 AM
idfergusson idfergusson is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Regina,Saskatchewan
Posts: 455
idfergusson is starting off with a positive reputation.
I replaced the 2.0 in my 87 Ranger with a 2.3 out of Mustang.The motors are basically identical except for the displacement and the ports are smaller on the head.I used the Mustang oil pan, put the flywheel and block plate from the 2.0 on the 2.3 (as the two motors are balanced the same) and bolted it in.The one problem I had was that I wanted to use the 2.0 carb.The 2.0 intake manifold bolts to a 2.3 head but doesn't cover the ports completely.At first I was going to use a 2.3 intake with my 2.0 carb but the carb bolt patterns were different and there were other intake problems.I ended up making a thin plate out of aluminum that fit between the intake and the head by using the 2.3 and 2.0 intake gaskets as a template.The outer dimension is the same as a 2.3 gasket, but the holes for the ports were taken from the smaller 2.0 gasket.I sandwiched the plate in between the intake and the head with the 2.0 gasket on the intake side and the 2.3 gasket on the head side and it has worked fine for about 3 yrs now.I can't remember if I used the original 2.0 exhaust manifold or the Mustang one but that didn't seem to be a problem.
Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2004, 10:52 AM
 
 
 
Reply

Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Performance, Engines & Troubleshooting > Other Ford Engines > 4 Cylinder Engines

Tags
20, 23, aluminum, betwwen, difference, engines, ford, head, intakes, interchangable, lima, motors, pinto, sohc, soup

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Are 2.3 and 2.0 same carb mount. bowtieboy77 Ranger & B-Series 5 11-07-2013 03:02 PM
Shopping for 4-cyl Escape - MPG 2.0L vs 2.3L? jas88 Escape & Escape Hybrid 13 06-15-2009 01:29 PM
2.0 and 2.3 heads pintoches 4 Cylinder Engines 16 04-04-2007 04:33 PM
2.3L swap in my 2.0L ranger rotwyler 4 Cylinder Engines 2 03-19-2007 01:16 AM
Engine Swap 87 Ranger Questions jndbedwell 4 Cylinder Engines 0 04-26-2003 04:02 PM



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 AC1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Statement - Jobs
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. FordŽ is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.

vbulletin Admin Backup