Duratec 2.3 - Engine Ideas, Questions

If and when I do something with my amazon...I am planning on going with a TDI...or some sort of diesel.

I'm kinda liking the specs on the 2.3 truck Duratec. Since this will be a commuter car, power and torque peaks lower in the RPM band might be easier to live with, and I can run a lower numerical rear end. The pushrod B18 in the Volvo now is a lovable little engine, but pretty tractoresque, so I'm sure I won't notice or care about the Ranger Duratec's lack of balance shafts. Plus the simplicity of swapping out an entire drivetrain from a donor vehicle is pretty high. If it works, and I'm feeling adventurous, I could always try the 2.0/ 2.3/ 2.5 car engine swap later.

jakeb wrote: If and when I do something with my amazon...I am planning on going with a TDI...or some sort of diesel.

One of those links I posted above is a RWD adaptor to a VeeDub Diesel. ACME I believe is the manufacturer. I thought about that, but VW reliability and cost scare me.

When I had my 1800S, I once managed 35mpg on a trip from NJ to Syracuse NY. It can be done, but you must "yeild" to hills (45mph highway)

Have you given any thought to updating the volvo ignition and fuel system?

A mechanical advance distributor is NOT going to deliver the mpg you want.

I'd recommend MS for ignition, and fuel deliver. Use a set of ITBs, and get a decent map with decent high vacuum, mid rpm programming.

IF you want an interesting swap option.. Toyotas 4AGE is very similar power output- a few more hp, a few les #/ft. The Toyota could be modified a little to provide more then enough torque, while adding substanntial hp.

volvoclearinghouse wrote: One of those links I posted above is a RWD adaptor to a VeeDub Diesel. ACME I believe is the manufacturer. I thought about that, but VW reliability and cost scare me.

It's like the old saying... "Cummins makes a great engine too bad it's saddled with such a E36 M3ty wrapper Dodge body."

Same with VW.....

Ranger50 wrote:

volvoclearinghouse wrote: One of those links I posted above is a RWD adaptor to a VeeDub Diesel. ACME I believe is the manufacturer. I thought about that, but VW reliability and cost scare me.

It's like the old saying... "Cummins makes a great engine too bad it's saddled with such a E36 M3ty wrapper Dodge body." Same with VW.....

except in my personal experience it isn't a great engine.....so that'd make it a pile of E36 M3 inside of a pile of E36 M3? Freaking paradox man.....

My tow/ general abuse vehicle is a '92 Dodge with a 12V Cummins. Awesome engine. Worst truck ever. ;-)

In reply to volvoclearinghouse:

We've just had a never ending series of problems with them in AG related applications.....and the response from Cummins is what sealed their fate IMHO.

In reply to fastEddie: It should be, with a few minor differences. There are a few threads on swapping a 2.5 into a 2.3 Mazda3

bgkast wrote: In reply to fastEddie: It should be, with a few minor differences. There are a few threads on swapping a 2.5 into a 2.3 Mazda3

Just to reiterate and be extra clear, there was no such thing as a 2.5L Duratec I4 powered Ranger. So the engine referenced by fastEddie would inherently be a Lima engine. The 2.5L Duratec I4 is only found in the newest Escape/Fusion/etc. While that too can bolt to the 2.0L/2.3L Duratec transmissions, the actual "Ranger 2.5L" will quite simply not bolt directly to ANY Duratec application.

FastEddie Was asking about swapping a 2.5 into a 2.3focus. You can also find the 2.5 in 2nd gen Mazda3s.

bgkast wrote: FastEddie Was asking about swapping a 2.5 into a 2.3focus. You can also find the 2.5 in 2nd gen Mazda3s.

Please reference the 4th word in his post...The devil is always in the details. Regardless of whether it was his intention or not, it is what he specifically stated.

10-4 delete the word ranger and the answer becomes yes.

yamaha wrote: In reply to volvoclearinghouse: We've just had a never ending series of problems with them in AG related applications.....and the response from Cummins is what sealed their fate IMHO.

Oh, their newer engines with the EGR coolers (specifically the ISLs) are horrible. But I've never heard of anyone who had troubles with the old brick-simple 12V engines. And to be fair, every mfr seems to be having fits with the EGR coolers and DEF injection. No one's yet unearthed the magic stick that makes it all work correctly.

I don't think 35mpg is out of the question on a properly-tuned Volvo B20. Thing is, Amazon sedans have a 4.10 rear axle. I would sooner look at swapping the axle for something with shallower gears, swapping in a T5 (adapters exist) for a taller overdrive, adding an electronic ignition, and putting an economy tune on the engine.

I think that's a lot more cost-effective than inventing an engine swap.

I would pull a 2.3 out of a Ford Turbo Coupe t-bird. Very cheap and easy. Plenty of write ups on therangerstation.com 30mpg should be easily attainable.

Another option for a transmission is the unit from the NC Miata. It should give you a further back shifter location which may be an issue with the ranger transmission. I imagine that the 5 spd miata units would be pretty cheap. With that said, you could look for an entire 06 Miata drive train. There shouldn't be much demand for those. Not nearly as easy to find as the ranger though.

You might want to consider a nissan ca18det, it is a turbo 1.8. Many parts are available, very cheap, at low boost levels mpg should be good, and the turbocharger will make up for the lack of displacement from the ford option. It can easily outpower the ford with a few breathing upgrades. And for max fuel economy i would reccomend tuning a megasquirt ecu for that purpose

I've heard the NC Miata gearboxes work, but are $$$$.

The B18/B20 volvo "might" get 35 mpg with a t5, some taller gears out back, a light foot, and some FI, but the 2.3 Ford swap would give me a little extra powah to boot and a newer, more modern powertrain.

Both are interesting options. All I know is, I paid 3.79/ gallon last night, and was pretty pissed.

I'd consider a swap if I wanted the entire package that a newer drivetrain presents - smoother, quieter, higher specific output, better gearing, et cetera. But bear in mind that most engine swaps end up incomplete or unsatisfying. If it's really milleage that you're about, I'd recommend finding a fuel injection setup from a later Volvo and bolting it in. Megasquirt for fuel and spark would be ideal. Then look around for an overdrive to bolt onto that gearbox. Those are both easier jobs than an engine/tranny swap, and would probably preserve the value of the car better as well. I used to be able to coax low 30s out of my 544 on the freeway. I'd think that with better fuel, ignition and gearing, you could see close to 40 on the freeway and mid-to-upper 20s in the city.

Driven5 wrote:

fastEddie wrote: So would a Ranger 2.5 be a "drop-in" replacement for a 2.3 5-spd Focus (like mine)?

For the purposes of this discussion anything relating to a 2.3L Ranger engine is referring specifically to the 2001.5+ Duratec powered Ranger. The prior 2.3L and 2.5L Ranger engines are Lima engines that are totally unrelated to the Duratec.

Yes, and the virtually identical Mazda B2500 used the 2.5 SOHC Lima through at least 2001 (that's what mine has).

OTOH, that make for an easy T-Bird turbo swap.

2.0L Duratec; MS; T5; Volvo Dana30 rearend, 1800 lbs. - lots of fun -- http://www.midgetec.com/

I think you'll be hard pressed to get 40mpg on the highway. If you get all the bugs worked out - low - perhaps mid 30's if you have it geared long for the highway runs. My 242 with 5.0L/3.55 gears/.625 OD 5th routinely knocks down 27-28 on the highway...

The B18 has huge bearings and lots of them, the piston is really long and heavy, the rings are huge, the big end of the rods are giant, the timing gear is a massive hunk... I don't think those old motors are going to make much mileage.

I've got a few other Toyota engines that might interest you....

email me if interested

I pulled some specs for the Ranger 2.3. 154 torques at 3750 rpm. 140hp at 5250. The od on the 5 speed is .79. And the torquey truck engine still makes 50hp at 2000rpm_ plenty to push the volvo down the highway at 65mph. If its geared thusly, it could be a nice little setup.

Even the b20 red engine only made about 120 torques, at higher revs.

The B Engines are fun little plants from a vintage standpoint, tough, reliable, and tuneable. But, in addition to the points made above about its inefficiencies, it also lacks a cross-flow head, so flow characteristics are limited. Yes, all these flaws are correctible, but at significant cost- almost certainly more than buying a rear-ended ranger and removing its running gear.