2.0 vs 2.3
Elder User
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 692
Likes: 0
Okay, lets shoot some of the misinformatoin in the head while
we have a chance... There two 2.0L SOHC all iron engines, one
is the 2.0L "EAO", which came in the Capri and the early Pintos,
then there in the 2.0L "LIMA", which is the smaller bore brother
of the 2.3L "LIMA". Now for the Mazdas, the original small pick up
was called the Courier, which was all Mazda, with a different grill...
It had a 1.8L SOHC with an aluminum head, and later, a 2.0L, also
with an aluminun head, 1977 (?) saw the first all Ford built Couriers
which came with the 2.3L Lima engine...
SteveL
we have a chance... There two 2.0L SOHC all iron engines, one
is the 2.0L "EAO", which came in the Capri and the early Pintos,
then there in the 2.0L "LIMA", which is the smaller bore brother
of the 2.3L "LIMA". Now for the Mazdas, the original small pick up
was called the Courier, which was all Mazda, with a different grill...
It had a 1.8L SOHC with an aluminum head, and later, a 2.0L, also
with an aluminun head, 1977 (?) saw the first all Ford built Couriers
which came with the 2.3L Lima engine...
SteveL
Logistics Pro
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,907
Likes: 39
From: suburban atlanta
And they say restrictor plate engines are limited to NASCAR. Heck, we have them with Ranger trucks!! Aluminium plates to match carbs to manifolds. Heavens, what will be next, ... sheesh, I don't know how to finish this up.
Ah, well, the carb'd 2.0 is no match for an EFI 2.3. The 2.3 will fall behind the 2.5 .. Don't let me get started on those twin-plug thingies....
The mainfolds hung off the 2.3 are varied. Pinto, Mustank, Ranger... Mazda, too.
At least they are not the Deutsch 2.0 from the early Pinto (71-73). Tho, it did have mech lifters, and was able to rev nice..
tom
Ah, well, the carb'd 2.0 is no match for an EFI 2.3. The 2.3 will fall behind the 2.5 .. Don't let me get started on those twin-plug thingies....
The mainfolds hung off the 2.3 are varied. Pinto, Mustank, Ranger... Mazda, too.
At least they are not the Deutsch 2.0 from the early Pinto (71-73). Tho, it did have mech lifters, and was able to rev nice..
tom
Senior User
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by canzus
Now for the Mazdas, the original small pick up
was called the Courier, which was all Mazda, with a different grill...
It had a 1.8L SOHC with an aluminum head, and later, a 2.0L, also
with an aluminun head, 1977 (?) saw the first all Ford built Couriers
which came with the 2.3L Lima engine...
SteveL
was called the Courier, which was all Mazda, with a different grill...
It had a 1.8L SOHC with an aluminum head, and later, a 2.0L, also
with an aluminun head, 1977 (?) saw the first all Ford built Couriers
which came with the 2.3L Lima engine...
SteveL
Last edited by Dodge41; Dec 9, 2004 at 10:11 AM.
Elder User
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 692
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Dodge41
Mazda wasnt the orginal small pickup truck, as mini trucks were built as early as the late 50's from Japan.
but the Mazda was the original FORD mini pick up, not the
first mini pick up...
SteveL
Junior User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
From: MN.
Originally Posted by canzus
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
6 cylinder with 2 of them removed, just about as bullit proof as the 6,
just less power...
SteveL
Steve
I guess I stand corrected,
In 1994 I bought a new Tempo with a 2.3 engine the Ford Salesman told me it was the same engine Ford was using in the Ranger. That's where I got the idea they were the same.
The Tempo is still in my family, I gave it to my son about four years ago, he's using the car to drive to college. the 2.3 in those cars are a great little engine..
Greg
1981 F100 Custom SB Inline
Elder User
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 692
Likes: 0
They are the same...
size and manufacturer...
anyway, the 2.3/2.5 OHV are dead nuts reliable,
which is "a good thing" as Martha would say...
SteveL
size and manufacturer...
anyway, the 2.3/2.5 OHV are dead nuts reliable,
which is "a good thing" as Martha would say...
SteveL
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
10 Things Every Truck Owner NEEDS (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
New User
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Ford used 2.0 motors starting in 1983. ( Their own) I have an 88 ranger that had a 2.0 that was in bad shape. The 2.0 is an under bored 2.3. Internal parts won't interchange but most external parts will. I just had the flywheel redone with a new ring gear and resurfacing and put it on a 2.3 that I had souped up to put in my 90 ranger. The five speed tranny from the 88 is the same five speed tranny I have in the 90.
lil red ranger
lil red ranger
Junior User
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
The early 80's rangers came with a 2.0 Lima engine. The head was round port intake. There was two round port heads used, one for the 2.0 and one for the 2.3 rangers. The 2.3 RP ranger head had bigger valves. The intake manifolds were of dubious design and performance was not part of it. They both had the same head bolt, water and oil patterns.
The 2.3 engine in the taurus etc is the HSC engine, a completely different design, nothing interchanges.
The latest 2.3 rangers are the Dura Tech engine, again completely different.
The 2.3 engine in the taurus etc is the HSC engine, a completely different design, nothing interchanges.
The latest 2.3 rangers are the Dura Tech engine, again completely different.
New User
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Old Rob,
You are correct, I believe both of mine are the Limas.
The real prblem facing me right now is the MAZDA M50D-R1 from both the 88 and 90 have two different style clutch slaves. I bought the clutch kit for the 90 and the slave from the 88 does not have the same throw out bearing. 88 thru 92 are supposed to interchange. Wonder if someone had put an earlier 5 speed in the 88?
Are we allowed to post a picture of the new build Lima?
lil red ranger
You are correct, I believe both of mine are the Limas.
The real prblem facing me right now is the MAZDA M50D-R1 from both the 88 and 90 have two different style clutch slaves. I bought the clutch kit for the 90 and the slave from the 88 does not have the same throw out bearing. 88 thru 92 are supposed to interchange. Wonder if someone had put an earlier 5 speed in the 88?
Are we allowed to post a picture of the new build Lima?
lil red ranger
Posting Guru
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,448
Likes: 1
The three tower head was used on the Pinto 2.0 engines from 1972 to 1974. They were not used on 2.3 engines. The heads on the 2.0 and 2.3 later engines are the same and can be interchanged. The blocks cannot. The early 2.0 with the three towers has the distributor located close to the front of the block. On the 2.3 is is further back.jd
jd
Junior User
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
The rangers around the 81 thru 84 years had a round port head. there were two versions, one for the 2.0 Lima and one for the 2.3 lima. They both had a corresponding manifold that will not bolt to any of the earlier or later 2.3 lima'sThe exhaust was the same.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
