2.3 swap

[Dueces]

So I have seen a bunch of people talking about the 2.0 vs the 2.3, and lots of people think the 2.0 is a closed block. It is not. They went to an open block back in the 2015-2017 range, when they also put in the "coolant slits" between the cylinders. In 2019, they revised the block again, to be cross drilled between cylinders to keep the head gaskets happy and get rid of coolant intrusion into the cylinders. However, they kept the open deck design.

So, besides that, I believe that unless you are going to push power way over the 400whp mark, going to a 2.3L is not going to give you the extra power you are looking for. I would assume the physical limitation on both engines will be the rods, so if you want to build a block, I would buy whatever version you can find cheaper, as you will have to upgrade internals in either case.

I believe the 2.3 would help in launching, as the 15% increase in size should directly correlate into more torque. But then again, there have been very few people using launch control as it is.

Just my .02

Sponsored

 

[Nodal]

So I have seen a bunch of people talking about the 2.0 vs the 2.3, and lots of people think the 2.0 is a closed block. It is not. They went to an open block back in the 2015-2017 range, when they also put in the "coolant slits" between the cylinders. In 2019, they revised the block again, to be cross drilled between cylinders to keep the head gaskets happy and get rid of coolant intrusion into the cylinders. However, they kept the open deck design.

So, besides that, I believe that unless you are going to push power way over the 400whp mark, going to a 2.3L is not going to give you the extra power you are looking for. I would assume the physical limitation on both engines will be the rods, so if you want to build a block, I would buy whatever version you can find cheaper, as you will have to upgrade internals in either case.

I believe the 2.3 would help in launching, as the 15% increase in size should directly correlate into more torque. But then again, there have been very few people using launch control as it is.

Just my .02

Thank you. Very helpful post.

 

[Snox801]

I’m not sure on the years. I am pretty sure my 17 has a closed deck.
But the talk when rebuilding is using an older st style closed deck.
The theory is that the closed deck reduces the cowbell. Hence why they want 2.0. The block is not better because of it was the block the braced 2.3 would not hold over 500whp. I’m an above 500awhp in my rs. If they indeed went to an open deck then you gain nothing using a 2.0. But for reference when shopping the built engines they are indeed using the closed deck.
Still the 2.3 open deck with a brace is the way to go if you really wanna push the limits and have it right.
That being said I was able to run 420whp with a stock 2.3 block and nx2 turbo with zero issues and 389awhp zero issues on stock rs turbo. Maxed out on meth.
As stated the weak link is the rods. But im not sure you will ever need to deck brace or replace internals. You are never gonna touch 400whp with a 2.3 even using the upgrade ranger turbo. Compare that size turbo to a stock focus rs and it’s smaller. So 400whp is not gonna happen unless you are using a very very generous dyno.

 

[Dueces]

I think the ST kept the closed deck block through its US life cycle to 2018. I was watching a guy who was showing the dates of when they switched blocks, but it was for the Fusion, Escape, and the Lincoln variants.

 

[Snox801]

I think the ST kept the closed deck block through its US life cycle to 2018. I was watching a guy who was showing the dates of when they switched blocks, but it was for the Fusion, Escape, and the Lincoln variants.

That makes sense. I did see the companies offering 2.0 builds now specifically state its st block.

 

[Fast Mavericks]

For what it’s worth, here’s what the gauge says it’s making. Obviously crank but not bad compared to the stock 250 hp.

 

[Snox801]

That’s a crazy number. Very efficient considering you getting very close to maxed out stock turbo output of the rs which has a much larger turbo.
You are making great power good job.

 

[Defconxzero]

as for the swap yes a 2.3 from the rs or mustang should work. It won’t be a simple manifold swap as we have headifolds as does the rs 2.3 and mustang. What you will need is the turbo setup because they are controlled differently. But in theory yes it should be a fairly simple swap. Then write the ecu starter map as one for a 2.3 mustang or rs. Both are basically the exact same with a slight machine work on the rs block.
Different turbos for different go levels between the two.

@Snox801
I know you've mentioned the turbo differences several times. and im not sure FastMavericks went with either of them (from the oem 2.0 or the 2.3 he had), but could you clarify?
If one found a complete 2.3 with its turbo, could one directly swap the whole thing? then just reverse the waste gate connectors as FastMavs mentioned? or are you saying one would have to use the original 2.0 turbo..

 

[Jacobrippey1]

@Snox801
I know you've mentioned the turbo differences several times. and im not sure FastMavericks went with either of them (from the oem 2.0 or the 2.3 he had), but could you clarify?
If one found a complete 2.3 with its turbo, could one directly swap the whole thing? then just reverse the waste gate connectors as FastMavs mentioned? or are you saying one would have to use the original 2.0 turbo..

The 2.3 turbo (***edit. 2.3 Turbo from the Corsair) bolts right to the factory downpipe, from what I've read. So, no, you wouldn't reuse the 2.0 turbo.

 

[Dueces]

The 2.3 turbo bolts right to the factory downpipe, from what I've read. So, no, you wouldn't reuse the 2.0 turbo.

The only 2.3T that bolts directly to our downpipe is the Corsair 2.3T. The Ranger, Mustang, Explorer, etc. do not bolt up directly.

You definately wouldn't want to choke that engine with a factory turbo either, haha.

 

[papawmark]

All I can say is I have a Cobb tuned Maverick that doesn't make anywhere near these hp numbers I'm seeing. Having said that, since I have owned and punished a 2019 tuned and heavily modded Ranger for 106K, I can't see ANYWAY that the Maverick transmission can handle the low end torque of the 2.3L Ecoboost......NOWAY!! Maybe for a little while but I sure wouldn't do a engine swap in the Mav without a tranny swap too. Gonna get the Tranny's Gone light.....IMHO.

 

[Snox801]

As already stated he went with a Corsair turbo. But in theory you could swap the whole package with a rs engine and turbo. You would have to figure out how to mechanically get the system setup and the control part could be done in the ecu.
As for the trans you could be ok with a big turbo like on the rs as trq wouldn’t hit so fast. And you could always trq limit it in the ecu in the first few gears.

 

[papawmark]

Just with a Livernois OTS tune, the 2.3 power train setup in the 5g Ranger comes out of the hole with about 400 ft/lbs of torque….the RS is probably around that stock….definitely a lot of stress on a tranny…
I’m hoping they put a 2.3 setup in the Maverick sometime down the road…talk about fun!

Sponsored