Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums

Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums (https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/index.php)
-   4 Cylinder Engines (https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/forum58/)
-   -   2.0 vs 2.3 (https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/314926-2-0-vs-2-3-a.html)

oldhalftons 12-04-2004 10:17 PM

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

fordman98 12-05-2004 02:10 AM

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.

oldhalftons 12-05-2004 12:09 PM

the truck orginally came with a 2.0 acording to the VIN and emission sticker

Dodge41 12-05-2004 11:39 PM

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.

oldhalftons 12-06-2004 01:38 AM

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?

63redtudor 12-06-2004 01:56 AM

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

tomw 12-06-2004 09:33 AM

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

fordman98 12-06-2004 11:11 AM

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

srod2 12-06-2004 03:10 PM

the 2.3 was used to power the tempo/topas 86/94 as well as the Ranger...

oldhalftons 12-06-2004 03:31 PM

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

Dodge41 12-06-2004 03:50 PM

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.

oldhalftons 12-06-2004 03:52 PM

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.

canzus 12-06-2004 07:32 PM

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

tomw 12-07-2004 08:59 AM

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

idfergusson 12-07-2004 11:52 AM

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.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:50 PM.