how to get power out of my 2.3 non turbo
- Thread starter 93mustang0125
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
Stinger
Founding Member
There really aren't any cheap, easy, mods for the non-turbo engines. You can do all the "normal" mods and the car will still be slower than most things on the road.
Check out my post in the oher 2.3 forum. There is some good info there.
http://forums.stangnet.com/showthread.php?t=607033
http://forums.stangnet.com/showthread.php?t=607033
A head swap may be out of the question here. His '93 is a dual plug motor. Not only is it blessed with one of the worst flowing 2.3 heads ever cast, it's also stuck with it unless the intake halves are changed for earlier pieces and the ignition is modified to work with half the plugs. It can be done but I wouldn't call it a cheap mod.
You say you're running dual exhaust on your car. Are you still running the stock cast iron exhaust manifold? You can free up a little power by sourcing a tubular manifold from a late model Ranger. Bolts right up with a little bit of modification needed to accomodate the EGR (some welding may be required on the tubing).
You can play a little with nitrous, but I wouldn't get carried away. Without the ability to easily adjust ignition timing, and cast pistons, detonation and the carnage that goes with it is just a wrong pill away.
Take a look at aftermarket camshafts. Your setup is hydraulic roller, and there's quite a few replacement cams that offer a performance improvement. This is another decent but not cheap mod.
If you don't expect much, you won't be dissapointed. There's decent power being made without a turbo, but not in anything I'd call a street car.
You say you're running dual exhaust on your car. Are you still running the stock cast iron exhaust manifold? You can free up a little power by sourcing a tubular manifold from a late model Ranger. Bolts right up with a little bit of modification needed to accomodate the EGR (some welding may be required on the tubing).
You can play a little with nitrous, but I wouldn't get carried away. Without the ability to easily adjust ignition timing, and cast pistons, detonation and the carnage that goes with it is just a wrong pill away.
Take a look at aftermarket camshafts. Your setup is hydraulic roller, and there's quite a few replacement cams that offer a performance improvement. This is another decent but not cheap mod.
If you don't expect much, you won't be dissapointed. There's decent power being made without a turbo, but not in anything I'd call a street car.
We now interrupt for a brief hijack.
Hey Stinger,
Have you seen the new Crane Cams catalog? There's a new hydraulic roller in there with specs just a little hotter than the stock DP cam. It must have a more agressive lobe profile than the good ol' RR cam because Crane recommends a dual spring for it. I think I'm going to give it a try on the Turbo motor when it gets built.
Okay, I now return you to your regularly scheduled topic. Thanks
Hey Stinger,
Have you seen the new Crane Cams catalog? There's a new hydraulic roller in there with specs just a little hotter than the stock DP cam. It must have a more agressive lobe profile than the good ol' RR cam because Crane recommends a dual spring for it. I think I'm going to give it a try on the Turbo motor when it gets built.
Okay, I now return you to your regularly scheduled topic. Thanks
What's the lift & duration?
I wouldn't be surprised if it's just a copy of the same cam everyone else has (Racer Walsh #1, Motorsport A234, etc).
I wouldn't be surprised if it's just a copy of the same cam everyone else has (Racer Walsh #1, Motorsport A234, etc).
http://www.cranecams.com/pdf/Page406-407.pdf
A copy? Maybe. But a roller copy of a tried and true slider grind. That's a good thing in my book.
A copy? Maybe. But a roller copy of a tried and true slider grind. That's a good thing in my book.
Doh! For some reason I read your post and was thinking "hydraulic slider" even though you put hydraulic roller.
That is a copy, actually. Those are the exact same specs the A237 uses, and it's a roller cam...and you can pick those up for $100. I guarantee you that one probably costs close to $300 (that's what RW's #1 roller costs)
Cool to see that crane makes that many different roller cams for the 2.3 though
That is a copy, actually. Those are the exact same specs the A237 uses, and it's a roller cam...and you can pick those up for $100. I guarantee you that one probably costs close to $300 (that's what RW's #1 roller costs)
Cool to see that crane makes that many different roller cams for the 2.3 though
yo bro..where u find the cold air intake i bough 1 b4 but it didnt work bc i have a mass air flow sensor so i sold it to my buddy with his 89 2.3 mines a 93 hatch 2.3L I got the kn air filter and the 40 series muffler soon to come is the superchip, and the header.... i need more help on performance so wat u got comin and wat u find out and where did u git the air intake from?... you can check my project stang at www.cardomain.com/id/chickmagnetstang shes not the greastest but she runs like a champ n i love my baby..so yeah jus need more performance thanx bro
I think you can do these couple of things from what I have heard talking to 2.3L gurus
2.3L Ranger roller cam
2.5L stroker kit
Port your head
Ranger headers (port them)
Cold air intake (they also make ram air I really don't see the difference)
65MM throttle body ones off the 4.6L V8 out of a Crown Vic (heard may need throttle body spacer)
2in. exhaust (Port it)
Flow Master 40 series or if you after just noise get a glasspacks
A big coil (minute HP but still ever little bit helps)
Slightly bigger fuel injecters I think a stock 2.3L has 19lb fuel injecters
Doing all of this you could probly go to 190 and that engine for it's time already had a butt load of torque.
2.3L Ranger roller cam
2.5L stroker kit
Port your head
Ranger headers (port them)
Cold air intake (they also make ram air I really don't see the difference)
65MM throttle body ones off the 4.6L V8 out of a Crown Vic (heard may need throttle body spacer)
2in. exhaust (Port it)
Flow Master 40 series or if you after just noise get a glasspacks
A big coil (minute HP but still ever little bit helps)
Slightly bigger fuel injecters I think a stock 2.3L has 19lb fuel injecters
Doing all of this you could probly go to 190 and that engine for it's time already had a butt load of torque.
t3hmu5749 said:
Um....no?
Where'd you get this info from?
First, you can't port a Ranger manifold because it's already a tubular steel header.
Second, how do you "port" exhaust pipe?
Third, a throttle body from a 4.6L is not the one that fits relatively easily. You have to use one from a '94-95 5.0L Mustang, or Thunderbird Super Coupe, and you have to make new holes for the bolts in the throttle body and modify the throttle cable attachment.
Fourth, there's no way in hell that small amount of stuff is gonna get you 190 hp, or even 190 ft-lbs of torque if that's what you were referring to.
And why the 2" exhaust? I think the factory stuff is 2 1/4" isn't it?
Big coil? Pay attention. It's a 93. It's got a pair of coil packs. The Motorcraft coils are just fine, unless you just gotta blow the money on something red, shiny and embossed with an MSD logo to impress your friends.
Stock 5.0 injectors are 19 lb/hr. Stock 2.3 injectors are either 12 or 14 lb/hr.
Big coil? Pay attention. It's a 93. It's got a pair of coil packs. The Motorcraft coils are just fine, unless you just gotta blow the money on something red, shiny and embossed with an MSD logo to impress your friends.
Stock 5.0 injectors are 19 lb/hr. Stock 2.3 injectors are either 12 or 14 lb/hr.
Shawneebear93
Dirt-Old 20+Year Member
Stock is a weak 2 inches, we've all gone with 2 1/4 or even 2 1/2 to replace the stock stuff. Save for the turbo guys, they've got 3".RustBucket said:
Thanks for clarifying.
Stinger
Founding Member
t3hmu574n9 said:
Yeah, and I asked, where did you get that info from? Because it's completely wrong.
I don't see anywhere in my post where I was pissed or "an ass." If you took it that way, then boo-hoo.
Similar threads
