The Tempo 2.3 is a different engine entirely. There were two versions, the HSC and HSO and they were designed specifically for the Tempo/Topaz platform.

I don't know much about them beyond that. Here's a link with more info:

http://www.tempotopaz.com/main/modul...rtid=35&page=1

Mattri, I really can't seem to find much info on the Ford 2.3 industrial engine beyond the fact that they do exist. Your assumption that they were used in pumps/generators etc. is probably correct, and possibly forklifts and the like as well.

 

thanks.. i thought they were different but wasnt sure
the 2.3 industrial was used in forklifts- we have one at work
some boats had them too- some even had a 460 head on them (d3ve casting)
found that out in my 460 research

 

WWWHHHAATTT???? THAT'D BE COOL!!! Get your hands on a D0VE head and slap it in there, instant boost in performance! I wonder if the "regular" 2.3's block is the same...

 

the dove head doesnt flow any better than the d3ve head, its just got a smaller chamber for higher compression.

also thinking about it it couldnt work- the industrial has to be different because the 2.3 pinto/ranger engine is overhead cam, and the 460 is a pushrod motor

 

Yeah, I guess that's right (OHC vs OHV). However, the higher compression is pretty huge; on a stock 460 going from a D3VE to a D0VE raises the compression from 7.8:1 to 9.2:1 which is a pretty big jump. I think the D3VE is 97cc's and the D0VE is ~75cc's.

BTW it's D-zero-V-E. The second letter is actually a number. (D0VE, D1VE, D2VE, D3VE).

Does anyone know how much can be shaved off a stock 2.3L cylinder head before hitting water? I'd like to raise my compression up to about 10.5:1...

 

when i was originally looking at buying my uncle's pinto i was figuring on converting to propane, so i was figuring on trying to get 11.5-1 compression. came to find out that without custom pistons the best i could do was 10-1.

 

That's odd.. In one of my other posts someone said that you could shave off almost .200 inches and be safe. Do this and still only get to 10:1?? Are the pistons dished?

 

the 2.3 turbo head you can shave that much off... but it needs the strength for the extra cylinder pressure and the extra space to lower the compression- also when you shave that much off it becomes an interference head where the valves will ram themselves into the piston if the belt slips or breaks.

 

Back in my racing days I ran a a 2.0, but some of my buddies ran the 2.3. We were always comparing notes on our experiments with head milling, and we found that on the 2.3 you could generally remove .100 safely but on some heads you could go more, it was just dependent on the casting. A few guys tried taking off larger amounts and had some cracking problems, but I'm not sure if anyone ever kept track of casting numbers to find a head that seemed safer than others.

To get the higher compression we also decked the block. Since the pistons are something like .060 down in the bore, we would take that much off to get a zero deck. I'm not 100% positive my numbers are correct, it's been a while...

 

Where are the casting numbers hidden on these heads? I think it'd be worth it to find out exactly which casting I have and do an internet search for some #'s. If this engine is as popular in the aftermarket as people say it is, there should be a plethora of information out there about performance combo's (and maybe some cheap heads for experimentation).

 

There is no, non, nada difference between the Turbo and NA head castings! The same is true for the cranks, rods, blocks. NA used cast pistons, and Turbo used forged with dish.
Zero deck, with .045 head gasket, and approx 56cc chambers will get you 10:1 CR. The accepted max is to mill to the intake studs, approx .180

 

What about without decking the block? I'm trying to shave some cost out of this project... 0.045 gasket, head shaved to the max, what would that get?

 

"The same is true for the cranks, rods, blocks. NA used cast pistons, and Turbo used forged with dish."
actually thats not true-not all the castings are the same- the turbo crank is 44 lbs, along with the n/a equivalent from the same years, but the old school 1973 pinto 2.3 crank was 34 lbs. the turbo blocks had higher nickel content as well as forged connecting rods.. the turbocoupe block was built to take the extra power vs the original pinto's 78hp, but the pinto will revv quicker because of the lighter rotating assembly. my ideal gas conservative vehicle would be a 1971 mercury capri with a 2.3 turbo block, n/a, with a pinto crank and domed forged custom pistons, running about 11.5-1 compression running dual fuel e-85/propane

 

I wonder why Ford went thru the added expense of making a new 2.3 just for the Topaz cars when they already had the OHC 2.3?

 

First the 73 pinto's biggest engine was the 2.0 German engine and yes that crank is lighter than the 74 up 2.3
Go to the ford parts book and you will not see a different part number for the turbo block, cranks or head casting in any given year. All of the 2.3 rods till 1997 were forged. They went to the powder metal rods. In 1995 they also changed the length from 5.205 to 5.457. Now the only higher nickel block was the SVO high deck block which was never installed in a vehicle from the factory.