Sponsored

2019 Ranger 2.3T turbocharger specifications

Dueces

2.0L EcoBoost
Well-known member
First Name
John
Joined
Jun 29, 2021
Threads
14
Messages
400
Reaction score
983
Location
Alpha, IL
Vehicle(s)
2022 AWD Maverick XL, 2004 Insight Turbo
Engine
2.0L EcoBoost
Hello everyone, this is my first thread I've made here, but I've randomly been in some of the more performance oriented chats.

I am still waiting for my Maverick to be delivered, it's been sitting in Chicago for 3 weeks now, not sure what they are holding it for.

While waiting, I have been doing some research, and I have been looking at all of the turbos on the 2.3T models in Ford's lineup. I ended up with this turbo because it was cheap, and I found dyno videos showing 93 octane tunes putting down roughly 310-330whp in rangers and explorers. Even more with an upgraded high pressure fuel pump, and E85. That dyno was 355whp/474wtq. So, I know this turbo is more than up to the task to making the power I want out of the Maverick.

So I took a bunch of measurements of the turbo and will show that all in my pictures. The compressor wheel is a 46mm inducer/61mm exducer. I haven't found actual specs of the Maverick's turbo, but judging by the few pics I have seen, I'm guessing the compressor inducer is between 42-44mm.

There are a couple issues I haven't been able to verify yet. On the Ranger/Explorer turbos, the electronic wastegate actuator is actually a mirror image of the Maverick/Escape/BS unit, and as long as the connector pinout is the same, I think this will not be a problem, but I need to verify that. The other issue is I am not positive yet if the exhaust bolt pattern is the same between the units, I'm thinking they should be, but again, I need verification.

The only other major change I think the Maverick is in need of, is the intercooler, as has been posted by many. Thankfully, someone on here has already fitted a Focus RS unit on their Maverick, an I plan to do the same.

Ok, sorry for the long read, on to some pics!

Ford Maverick 2019 Ranger 2.3T turbocharger specifications 20220429_210228


Ford Maverick 2019 Ranger 2.3T turbocharger specifications 20220429_174349


Ford Maverick 2019 Ranger 2.3T turbocharger specifications 20220429_174355


Ford Maverick 2019 Ranger 2.3T turbocharger specifications 20220429_174409


Ford Maverick 2019 Ranger 2.3T turbocharger specifications 20220429_174422


Ford Maverick 2019 Ranger 2.3T turbocharger specifications 20220429_175408


Ford Maverick 2019 Ranger 2.3T turbocharger specifications 20220429_204117


Ford Maverick 2019 Ranger 2.3T turbocharger specifications 20220429_204225


Ford Maverick 2019 Ranger 2.3T turbocharger specifications 20220429_204336


Thanks for looking, if you have questions, or need specific pics, let me know!

If noone gets detailed info out about the Maverick turbo, I will do so when I get my truck!
Sponsored

 

stangg17

2.0L EcoBoost
Active member
Joined
Aug 15, 2021
Threads
2
Messages
36
Reaction score
55
Location
Chicago
Vehicle(s)
Maverick
Engine
2.0L EcoBoost
The biggest problem with tuning these is that the transmission is undersized by a reasonable amount. Software is the only think keeping it from being shredded to pieces.
 

Scott Asheville

2.0L EcoBoost
Well-known member
First Name
Scott
Joined
Oct 4, 2021
Threads
55
Messages
1,227
Reaction score
2,591
Location
Asheville, NC
Vehicle(s)
2022 AWD XLT ECO LUX CP360 HPR
Engine
2.0L EcoBoost
I think you should have a blast (hopefully not literally) modifying your Maverick! Can't wait to see the results.
 
OP
OP
Dueces

Dueces

2.0L EcoBoost
Well-known member
First Name
John
Joined
Jun 29, 2021
Threads
14
Messages
400
Reaction score
983
Location
Alpha, IL
Vehicle(s)
2022 AWD Maverick XL, 2004 Insight Turbo
Engine
2.0L EcoBoost
The biggest problem with tuning these is that the transmission is undersized by a reasonable amount. Software is the only think keeping it from being shredded to pieces.
Do you have proof of this? I haven't heard of anyone breaking a trans yet.

What generally kills trans is an overabundance of torque. With a larger turbo like this one, ironically enough, the dyno's I have seen show less peak torque than the Maverick dyno's I have seen. I'm not a fan of rushing peak torque as fast as the engine will make it, because that makes a very peaky torque curve. My plan is to work with a tuner to bring torque in slower so it doesn't see 373wtq way down low in the powerband, like the maverick has shown to do. A larger turbo will only help in this as well because it will be more lazy.

I'm 100% with you on the trans being the physically weakest part of the setup, but there are ways to help prolong it's life, and have a great powerband up top! I would love to get some actual trans part numbers off of the Maverick, so I can do more research, but I haven't seen any posted yet.

John
 

Maverickman74

2.0L EcoBoost
Well-known member
First Name
Shane
Joined
Dec 8, 2021
Threads
57
Messages
4,958
Reaction score
6,663
Location
Maui HI
Vehicle(s)
96 Bronco, 91 Comanche, 93 ZJ, 80 Eagle, Bicycle
Engine
2.0L EcoBoost
Clubs
 
Love to see power upgrades, hopefully someone will come up with a transmission upgrade. I honestly cant believe I am buying a new vehicle with a automatic trans. First I wasnt ever going to buy a new vehicle then the Bronco had me interested with its 7speed. Now the low cost of the Maverick and its capabilities has me hooked, line and sinker. But damn I dont want another automatic in my life. I have only had 40% of the automatics I've owned not give me troubles within a couple years of ownership.

Please someone dig into these slush boxes and find us a complete upgrade for em. That way I can push the Mavericks 2.0 to where my old 306 Mavericks 400 tire shredding hp was(even that Mav had a broken parking pawl on its TCI superstreet fighter C4).
 

Sponsored

jewc75

2.0L EcoBoost
Well-known member
First Name
James
Joined
Nov 24, 2021
Threads
18
Messages
796
Reaction score
918
Location
Texas
Vehicle(s)
18 Z06 12 Mustang 22 Maverick 93 Lightning 19 GTI
Engine
2.0L EcoBoost
The trans is a 8f35 and has been around since 2017. The 2.0 already produces more torque than the trans is rated for.
 

cannon

2.0L EcoBoost
Well-known member
First Name
mark
Joined
Dec 24, 2021
Threads
4
Messages
231
Reaction score
333
Location
astoria oregon
Vehicle(s)
2022 Maverick XL awd
Engine
2.0L EcoBoost
Do you have proof of this? I haven't heard of anyone breaking a trans yet.

What generally kills trans is an overabundance of torque. With a larger turbo like this one, ironically enough, the dyno's I have seen show less peak torque than the Maverick dyno's I have seen. I'm not a fan of rushing peak torque as fast as the engine will make it, because that makes a very peaky torque curve. My plan is to work with a tuner to bring torque in slower so it doesn't see 373wtq way down low in the powerband, like the maverick has shown to do. A larger turbo will only help in this as well because it will be more lazy.

I'm 100% with you on the trans being the physically weakest part of the setup, but there are ways to help prolong it's life, and have a great powerband up top! I would love to get some actual trans part numbers off of the Maverick, so I can do more research, but I haven't seen any posted yet.

John
Part # NZ6Z7000B in my 2.0 without tow package, NZ6Z7000D with it.
 
OP
OP
Dueces

Dueces

2.0L EcoBoost
Well-known member
First Name
John
Joined
Jun 29, 2021
Threads
14
Messages
400
Reaction score
983
Location
Alpha, IL
Vehicle(s)
2022 AWD Maverick XL, 2004 Insight Turbo
Engine
2.0L EcoBoost
Awesome, thanks!
 

tmoney20g

2.0L EcoBoost
Well-known member
First Name
tony
Joined
Feb 8, 2022
Threads
4
Messages
59
Reaction score
68
Location
hammonton, nj
Vehicle(s)
2022 Maverick XLT FX4/Lux/4k/CP360
Engine
2.0L EcoBoost
Dave @Buschur also sent out a factory turbo to see what someone could do with it, don't quite remember where he sent it to....
 
Sponsored
OP
OP
Dueces

Dueces

2.0L EcoBoost
Well-known member
First Name
John
Joined
Jun 29, 2021
Threads
14
Messages
400
Reaction score
983
Location
Alpha, IL
Vehicle(s)
2022 AWD Maverick XL, 2004 Insight Turbo
Engine
2.0L EcoBoost
Yes I know what Dave has done. That's why I'm looking at these turbos, because I'm not paying $1000+ for a turbo upgrade, and $900 for an intercooler. I plan to have less than $1k into the performance mods of my Mav. Unless I get into the transmission side of things, then I know it'll get expensive....
 

stangg17

2.0L EcoBoost
Active member
Joined
Aug 15, 2021
Threads
2
Messages
36
Reaction score
55
Location
Chicago
Vehicle(s)
Maverick
Engine
2.0L EcoBoost
Do you have proof of this? I haven't heard of anyone breaking a trans yet.

What generally kills trans is an overabundance of torque. With a larger turbo like this one, ironically enough, the dyno's I have seen show less peak torque than the Maverick dyno's I have seen. I'm not a fan of rushing peak torque as fast as the engine will make it, because that makes a very peaky torque curve. My plan is to work with a tuner to bring torque in slower so it doesn't see 373wtq way down low in the powerband, like the maverick has shown to do. A larger turbo will only help in this as well because it will be more lazy.

I'm 100% with you on the trans being the physically weakest part of the setup, but there are ways to help prolong it's life, and have a great powerband up top! I would love to get some actual trans part numbers off of the Maverick, so I can do more research, but I haven't seen any posted yet.

John
I'm getting this info off several forums. Pretty sure someone bere also posted about that. And looks like some responses in this thread echo the same. I'll link if i come across it again.
 
OP
OP
Dueces

Dueces

2.0L EcoBoost
Well-known member
First Name
John
Joined
Jun 29, 2021
Threads
14
Messages
400
Reaction score
983
Location
Alpha, IL
Vehicle(s)
2022 AWD Maverick XL, 2004 Insight Turbo
Engine
2.0L EcoBoost
I have heard the same thing echoed around the forums, but I haven't yet heard of a single failure. I get that this isn't the 8F57 from the Edge ST, but I have been searching all over the place to find info, and all I keep seeing is the 8f35 being mentioned. Even when looking at the 2020+ Lincoln Corsair, if you look up axles, even the 2.3T for that shows the trans as an 8F35, and that 2.3 puts out 295hp/310tq!

I do not have factory manuals or any way to get ahold of factory info, maybe someone that works for Ford's parts department can be of some help? I hear the term 8F45 used as well, but have never seen anything relating it to a vehicle....

I'm still spending tons of time researching, so hopefully there are articles that can clear some of this up.
 

LC48

2.0L EcoBoost
Well-known member
First Name
Bill
Joined
Oct 24, 2021
Threads
5
Messages
364
Reaction score
521
Location
Johnson County Texas
Vehicle(s)
Maverick XLT, AWD, Carbonized Gray. Highlander Lim
Engine
2.0L EcoBoost
Clubs
 
I have not been able to find any actual Ford data on the 8F35 torque limit / rating. The only info has been a couple of old trade magazines that claim the Fords target torque for that box was lower than what 2.0 produces.

The only other piece of info related are @Buschur findings on the dyno with the factory tume closing down the throttle to apparently manage torque. Why they are doing that is up for debate.
 
OP
OP
Dueces

Dueces

2.0L EcoBoost
Well-known member
First Name
John
Joined
Jun 29, 2021
Threads
14
Messages
400
Reaction score
983
Location
Alpha, IL
Vehicle(s)
2022 AWD Maverick XL, 2004 Insight Turbo
Engine
2.0L EcoBoost
Every new vehicle, especially turbo, runs torque management to keep components happy. They damn sure aren't in it for guys like me that want more power, they need components to last as long as possible to avoid warranty work, keep them in the black.
Sponsored

 
 




Top