2.3L performance - Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums

Notices
Ranger & B-Series All Ford Ranger and Mazda B-Series models

2.3L performance

  #1  
Old 07-31-2006, 11:04 PM
Southernmudslinger
Southernmudslinger is offline
New User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 11
Southernmudslinger is starting off with a positive reputation.
2.3L performance

Im thinking about getting a 2.3 Ranger 5sd man. (98-02?) for gas mileage and had a few questions. I've read around, and the power of the 2.3 seems a little questionable. Anybody know about the 0-60 time? Any thing that might give me an idea of what kinda power they have, how much do they weigh? Do you have to take it real easy to get the really good gas mileage? And they get 23-25 mpg easy?
 
  #2  
Old 07-31-2006, 11:08 PM
RangerPilot's Avatar
RangerPilot
RangerPilot is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Durant, OK (SOSU)
Posts: 8,462
RangerPilot has a very good reputation on FTE.RangerPilot has a very good reputation on FTE.RangerPilot has a very good reputation on FTE.RangerPilot has a very good reputation on FTE.
Welcome to FTE!

Those years are the 2.5L years, basically the same engine.

It's gonna be slow. Take it slow and steady, shift early, be gentle about everything (you'll be last outta the lights) and you'll make your targets for MPG.
 
  #3  
Old 07-31-2006, 11:47 PM
john112deere's Avatar
john112deere
john112deere is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Maine
Posts: 1,651
john112deere is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
I have a '97 with the 2.3, a friend has a 2000 with the 2.5. Both are manual trans trucks.

The 2.3 is a little bit slower (and happens to be a lot older), but burns a bit less gas in my limited experience. I drove the 2.5 600 miles one weekend, and got about 22 mpg. My 2.3 gets 25-27 on that same run. I was going faster (70 vs. 62) in the 2.5 because the front suspension was in better condition, though.

Neither truck is all that fast. It doesn't bother me, and I love the mileage I get. I really can't comment about how gently you need to drive to get your target mpg. I tend to drive gently out of habit and to save wear on my truck, and when I need to push it because of traffic, I do. I get what I get for mileage.

RP is correct that the 2.5 is closely related to the 2.3. It is the same block but stroked out. After mid-'01, they went to a completely different, Mazda-designed, 2.3 (DOHC).
 
  #4  
Old 07-31-2006, 11:48 PM
wendell borror
wendell borror is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,147
wendell borror has a great reputation on FTE.wendell borror has a great reputation on FTE.wendell borror has a great reputation on FTE.wendell borror has a great reputation on FTE.
Your better off to get an 01 and up duratec dohc 2.3, more stock hp, and torque, better mpg, and there's a host of aftermarket performance parts from companies like cosworth. Cosworth has kits that can give you up to 250 hp without forced induction. A lot of the parts are made for the focus, but thingd like cams, heads, stroker kits can be used on the ranger. The 2.3-2.5 lima is a good engine, tried and true since the pinto days, but if power and mpg is a concern, go with the 2.3 dohc duratec.
 
  #5  
Old 07-31-2006, 11:52 PM
Southernmudslinger
Southernmudslinger is offline
New User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 11
Southernmudslinger is starting off with a positive reputation.
What could you compare it to as far as power goes (what other vehicle)?
 
  #6  
Old 08-01-2006, 12:17 AM
wendell borror
wendell borror is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,147
wendell borror has a great reputation on FTE.wendell borror has a great reputation on FTE.wendell borror has a great reputation on FTE.wendell borror has a great reputation on FTE.
A vette, just kidding !! It has close to a 150 hp(the duratec) sorta like the focus. I had one for a weekend as a loaner, it was an 02 with the duratec, and 5 speed, it was like driving a sports car, as long as you kept it reving, it would go. I had an 01 with the 2.5, and a 5 speed, the duratec seemed alot faster with better torque. In 01, they had both, the 2.5 lima, and the 2.3 duratec, it was a mid year change I guess. I don't remember the exact hp ratings, but the lima was around 120 hp, and the duratec around a 150 hp. My 06 focus st has the 2.3 duratec, it has 151 hp, and 154 pounds of torque.
 
  #7  
Old 08-01-2006, 12:22 AM
ericsmith32
ericsmith32 is offline
Elder User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Kansas City, KS
Posts: 549
ericsmith32 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
I have a 06 2.3 and I get 28 on average, got 29 last time. At 70-75 it doesn't even struggle up hills. Power compared to others... well I constantly whip the fart can ricers but that doesn't say much.
 
  #8  
Old 08-01-2006, 12:41 AM
Level2's Avatar
Level2
Level2 is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Higginsville, MO
Posts: 1,343
Level2 is starting off with a positive reputation.
The 2.3 Duratec in the Ranger is 143hp with 154lb/ft. of torque.
 
  #9  
Old 08-01-2006, 12:44 AM
Southernmudslinger
Southernmudslinger is offline
New User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 11
Southernmudslinger is starting off with a positive reputation.
similar get up and go as a PT cruiser? i dont consider a pt slow, but yet, not fast.
 
  #10  
Old 08-01-2006, 01:27 AM
RangerPilot's Avatar
RangerPilot
RangerPilot is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Durant, OK (SOSU)
Posts: 8,462
RangerPilot has a very good reputation on FTE.RangerPilot has a very good reputation on FTE.RangerPilot has a very good reputation on FTE.RangerPilot has a very good reputation on FTE.
I'd call them roughly the same yes. I haven't driven a PT but I've been in one under normal driving and hard acceleration.
 
  #11  
Old 08-01-2006, 04:13 AM
AlfredB1979
AlfredB1979 is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Alvin, Texas.
Posts: 1,978
AlfredB1979 is starting off with a positive reputation.
Originally Posted by Southernmudslinger
Im thinking about getting a 2.3 Ranger 5sd man. (98-02?) for gas mileage and had a few questions. I've read around, and the power of the 2.3 seems a little questionable. Anybody know about the 0-60 time? Any thing that might give me an idea of what kinda power they have, how much do they weigh? Do you have to take it real easy to get the really good gas mileage? And they get 23-25 mpg easy?

Well, If my 2.3L 94 SCab truck is any indication, I do NOT take it easy and I still get darn good MPGs.

Let's face it, the truck won't pass anything unless you rev it up. I make full use of 5th-3rd gear highway shifts and watch my tach climb towards 5000 RPMs and then some...

The power might not be "all that", but you didn't look at a 4 cylinder truck for power anyway.

Taking it easy on the revs might get worse gas mileage. My engine has almost 266,000 and I do not baby it.

If I want quicks...well, I am probably getting my Camaro (unrunning v6 version) sold and buying this 94 Mustang GT vert my friend plucked from an auction not too long back...he doesn't know it, but when I started that bad boy up and heard it purr...I can't stop thinking about it.

The Duratec trucks are fine, but until 2006, you were stuck with regular cabs. One reg cab compact truck was enough for me.
 
  #12  
Old 08-01-2006, 09:23 AM
sfcwoodret
sfcwoodret is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,337
sfcwoodret is starting off with a positive reputation.
The newer 2.3 duratec has good power for a 4 cyl. and good speed with great gas mileage.
 
  #13  
Old 08-01-2006, 01:36 PM
Southernmudslinger
Southernmudslinger is offline
New User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 11
Southernmudslinger is starting off with a positive reputation.
I was searching around, and found the curb weight of the ranger is 3000lbs. Is Curb weight what you go by as far as how much the whole truck weighs? If so, thats kinda light, the PT cruiser weighs about 300lbs more.
 
  #14  
Old 08-01-2006, 01:53 PM
RangerPilot's Avatar
RangerPilot
RangerPilot is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Durant, OK (SOSU)
Posts: 8,462
RangerPilot has a very good reputation on FTE.RangerPilot has a very good reputation on FTE.RangerPilot has a very good reputation on FTE.RangerPilot has a very good reputation on FTE.
I think curb weight is sitting there, no passengers, full tank of gas, nothing else in the vehicle.
 
  #15  
Old 08-01-2006, 02:04 PM
Southernmudslinger
Southernmudslinger is offline
New User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 11
Southernmudslinger is starting off with a positive reputation.
Anybody know the 0-60 time of the 2.5? The truck i have now, its about 10-11 secs. 0-60. Will the 2.5 spin tires or anything? just curious.......cause my truck wont, but if it does, it just barely does.
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: 2.3L performance


Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.