So, the sweet Transit Connect I bought has the Duratec 2.5L 4 cylinder in it. I really wanted the 1.6L Ecoboost version but the price on this sweet conveyance was just too low to ignore. I know the Duratec 2.5L is a pretty tough but dated engine. Its rated at 169hp and 171 lb. ft. in the TC which is sufficient, I guess. I'm not worried about the durability of the engine but I was hoping I could spice it up a bit.
Performance parts seem kinda lacking for the 2.5L. I've found ITBs, turbo kits for the 2L/2.3L and like one intake. I was hoping to find a supercharger but those don't seem to exist for the 2.5L. Is the 2.5L in the Ranger the same engine turned sideways?
I have an SCT X4 that I had on my 6.0 PSD but nobody seems to have tunes for the TC. I'd really just use it to sharpen the throttle response and firm the shifts up since the Ford 6F35 doesn't exactly have a stellar reputation for durability.
I feel that about 20 additional horsepowers/torques would be sufficient but 250hp/250lb ft would really be fun. I did find one crazy dude who swapped in the 2.0L Ecoboost and 6 speed from a wrecked Focus ST into his TC but that is a huge commitment that I don't feel is worth it on an $8k van. Although: Weeeeeeeeeeeeee!
What sayeth the hive? Any way to make reliable power in the 2.5L to be worth it?
STM317
SuperDork
3/9/19 6:41 a.m.
The only Duratec engine that was ever in a Ranger was the 2.3 beginning in 2001. The 2.5L from 98-01 is the older Lima SOHC.
Im pretty sure all of the Duratec 4 cylinders used the same basic head, just modified for VVT as necessary. And that can be negated if you want by blocking those oil passages. I'd wager that things like cams for the smaller Duratecs would work in the 2.5, but you'd have to delete the VVT. I'd be surprised if things that bolt to a 2.0 or 2.3 Duratec wouldn't bolt to the 2.5, so itbs, supercharger's, turbo manifolds, etc would at least fit the engine. That's only half the battle of getting it to work in your chassis though.
From a little more research, I *think* most of the 2.3L stuff fits the 2.5L block but of course its very application dependent. The Transit Connect shares its basic platform architecture with Ford's Global C platform which underpins the 2012-2018 Focus, 2011-2018 C-Max, and the 2013-218 Escape so, in theory, some engine stuff should fit.
Its difficult to say for sure without having both side by side.
Further research is needed 
2.5s have much larger ports than the other engines. Also 4340 (!!) cylinder liners and forged rods, not iron liners and compressed-cheese rods.
In reply to Knurled.
I wonder if 4340 was required due to space constraint, not enough room for the wall of cast iron?
In reply to TurnerX19 :
Not sure. Might be related to trying to reduce friction versus the really long stroke, as well.
Not every engine can be as awesome as having ground-to-size chrome plated bores like WWII aircraft... and Mazda rotaries
In reply to Knurled. :
Friction coefficient of 4340 not much different than cast iron. Not slippery like chrome plate. Lots harder to machine than iron though.
Knurled. said:
2.5s have much larger ports than the other engines. Also 4340 (!!) cylinder liners and forged rods, not iron liners and compressed-cheese rods.
Damn. I heard the 2.5L responds well to adding boost but I didn't know they were so over built.
No wonder they people swap them.
In reply to stanger_missle :
Not really overbuilt so much as the 2.3s are underbuilt. Supposedly the rods are really weak.
I remember when the engine was new, so of course someone with a Mazda6 decided to add boost. Rods died. Second attempt with good rods the block split vertically, like the failure some people are seeing on Focus RSs.
In reply to Knurled. :
Are you talking about the 2.3L splitting the block or the 2.5L?
While I can't really comment on the performance stuff, the 2.5L MZR (basically the same as the Duratec) in my 2012 Mazda 3 is still chugging along just fine with 175k on it. Doesn't burn oil and runs as well as the day I bought the car new back in 2011. I love that stupid thing.
In reply to stanger_missle :
The original 2.3s. Don't know if there were block updates later.
supercharges do exist. jamsport performance in the U.k. does carry them as well as many other crossover parts. many parts are available when looking at 13-16 mondeo.
Strizzo
PowerDork
8/29/20 9:29 p.m.
The 2.5 was a popular swap into 1gen mazda3s that had the 2.3 rod knock problem. Check the mazda forums, but there are tuning solutions for the mazda versions and I think the oem intakes were decent enough.
Gary
UltraDork
8/29/20 9:53 p.m.
I know, I know, I know. You're discussing the I4. However, I can't speak for the Duratec Four, but I love the special factory prodified 2.5 Duratec V6 in my Contour SVT.
I have a Mazda 5 with that 2.5. It's good. I drove a focus with the 2.0 for years and always loved the platform after that experience. I'd read that the 2.5 was the beef, and all the regular duratec speed bits can bolt up, but I have no experience. If you're not looking for crazy power, I know the 2.0 responded well to a good filter and exhaust so I'd imagine the 2.5 with it's bigger ports would do at least as well. Minimal investment and zero risk, so that's where I'd start.
*to be fair, I've been a huge fan of all ford 4s I've ever driven. Not sure why. The duratec is my fav though.
In reply to Gary :
That's because Mazda/Ford killed it with that baby 6. Such a sweet little song bird. Lively.
barefootskater said:
In reply to Gary :
That's because Mazda/Ford killed it with that baby 6. Such a sweet little song bird. Lively.
Ford did the sixes. Mazda had nothing to do with them.
The Duratec four was Mazda.
