[Scorcher000]

I am planing of building up my lil 2.0L and I have come a across a 2.3L CNC ported and polished head. Now when upgrading I could put all the 2.3L items in and get it tuned up. Only thing is will it work? Does it sound possible?

I'll post up what the items are later, but it should run about 250BHP at the end, Reving to 9000RPM.

[NefCanuck]

I don't think it's possible to bolt the 2.3L heads & H/W onto the 2.0L block and get it to run, but I could be wrong :unsure:

NefCanuck

[Scorcher000]

Maybe the only thing that I can see differnet is the lift. So I would have to get the 2.3L Crackshaft, head and tune everything else should be the same. Except for the VVT which I hear the Cosworth Intake Manifold will componsate for that some how???? :unsure: . Ken is planning on building a 2.3L engine up and dropping it in his Wagon, so I'd like hear what hes got to say.

http://www.sbdev.co.uk/SBD_West/SBD_Duratec_Westie.htm

[ZTWsquared]

Scorcher000,Nov 14 2008, 04:11 PM Wrote:Maybe the only thing that I can see differnet is the lift. So I would have to get the 2.3L Crackshaft, head and tune everything else should be the same. Except for the VVT which I hear the Cosworth Intake Manifold will componsate for that some how???? :unsure: . Ken is planning on building a 2.3L engine up and dropping it in his Wagon, so I'd like hear what hes got to say.

http://www.sbdev.co.uk/SBD_West/SBD_Duratec_Westie.htm
[right][snapback]276423[/snapback][/right]

Honestly I had never thought about doing it that way - for me getting a used 2.3 engine and building that leisurely was the only thing I considered ... so I really don't have any insight.

I do know that both 2.0 and 2.3 share the same bore @ 87.5 mm ... so that's one problem you won't have.

[thenorm]

according to this thread in which a well known tuner responds, it doesnt sound like a problem

http://www.focusfanatics.com/forum/showt...p?t=178742

[OAC_Sparky]

Displacement (ie 2.3L vs 2.0L) is stroke x bore. IF the bore is the same, then obviously the stroke is longer on the 2.3L.

Which in turn means that one of two truths must exist for the head:

EITHER: the 2.3L head is the same as the 2.0, the 2.3L will have a higher listed compression ratio than the 2.0L.

OR: the combustion chamber on a 2.3L head is bigger than that of the 2.0L

IF the listed compression ratios are NOT the same, then the heads are not the same.

Not saying that you can't use the heads, but you will have to compensate for the higher compression ratio by tune or octane rating or both.

[ZTWsquared]

OAC_Sparky,Nov 14 2008, 06:20 PM Wrote:Displacement (ie 2.3L vs 2.0L) is stroke x bore. IF the bore is the same, then obviously the stroke is longer on the 2.3L.

Which in turn means that one of two truths must exist for the head:

EITHER: the 2.3L head is the same as the 2.0, the 2.3L will have a higher listed compression ratio than the 2.0L.

OR: the combustion chamber on a 2.3L head is bigger than that of the 2.0L

IF the listed compression ratios are NOT the same, then the heads are not the same.

Not saying that you can't use the heads, but you will have to compensate for the higher compression ratio by tune or octane rating or both.
[right][snapback]276438[/snapback][/right]

I will bow to your expert knowledge, so consider this a question for the noobs ... assuming the compression ratio is about the same (both take 87) instead of a bigger combustion chamber, couldn't it be a simple matter of bigger valves and / or slightly longer duration on the intake to match the longer stroke?

[OAC_Sparky]

ZTWsquared,Nov 14 2008, 09:19 PM Wrote:I will bow to your expert knowledge, so consider this a question for the noobs ... assuming the compression ratio is about the same (both take 87) instead of a bigger combustion chamber, couldn't it be a simple matter of bigger valves and / or slightly longer duration on the intake to match the longer stroke?
[right][snapback]276457[/snapback][/right]

You can reduce the compression ratio artificially by changing the duration/cam timing (not so much valve size), but to do that you would have to leave the intake valve open during the compression stroke (ie close it late during the stroke) which is generally something you don't want to do because it would force heated air/fuel mixture back into the intake plenum.

Like I said, it is possible that the compression ratio between the two engines is close enough that you can compensate by the engine tune and still run 87 octane.

[Spinal]

from what i've read in the manual the compression ratio is 10:1 in the 2.0 and 9.7:1 in the 2.3, so the 2.3 has a longer stroke. i also remember reading the head is slightly taller to accommodate for that.

[GFXjamie]

im a little late on this topic, but i have looked a lot into the swap in the past.

the 2.0 and the 2.3 are essentially the exact same heads. the only difference between the two is that the 2.3 uses the same intake induction system style as the spec v with th butterflies opening up to accommodate more air coming in. the deck height of the 2.3 block is slightly higher to give it the stroke length.

in the end, doing a head swap will do virtually nothing for you as the heads are the same. if a 2.3l swap is something you like, get a 2.3l out of a fusion. VVT!! u can have maddd vtak yo! lol

o and as for the cams in the 2.3l.....

they have the same lift and duration on both intake and exhaust as the 2.0l

theres some fun facts for u guys