6:53 The eternal struggle of a Ford Fan like myself. It's a true love/hate relationship with their engineers. Some stuff is cleverly designed and ingenious, some stuff just feels like the engineers were betting each other how convoluted they could make a part!
Hello, do you know what that switch is next to where the lower intake manifold installed. You can see it at 6:24 at the top right again at 8:32 on the right of your hand
Nor sure which one your talking about. But the one towards the back of the motor close to the bellhousing I think is a coolant temp and the one towards the front of the motor that goes in to the back side of the auxiliary shaft sprocket I think is like a "cam position sensor". Hope this helps
Good video. Can you tell me what color the wire is that goes to the oil sending unit and the temperature unit? And maybe a picture of how that harness is mounted? 🤔
Hi Dave, I'm trying to find the coolant temp sensor on my 2007 Ranger with the 2.3 engine and when I watch videos of where it is they don't show the engine in my truck. My engine doesn't have any sensor mounted at the front or near the thermostat housing nor in the cylinder head, can you help? It's a twin overhead cam engine I think.
Actually, the 1998-2001 2.5s have the same main bearing journals as a 2.3 Lima. I know this because I am actually in the process of tearing down a 2.3, got that done, then went to a junkyard to grab the internals out of a 2.5, only to find out that the motor was blown. I did, however, get the crank, lay it in the '94 block I have, and there is no difference between the main journals on the 2.5 crank, and the '94 block. Where the main difference is that the wrist pin sits a bit different between generations of the engine, which I will have to check when I eventually get the block back together, since the 2.5 crank has a 7mm increase in stroke. The Cam Position Sensor was installed on 1995+ models, because the computer was changed from a 60-pin ECU to a 104-pin ECU. How you know you have a 1995 or newer truck/engine? The Ignition Module that was located on 1989-1994 models, on the intake manifold, was eliminated when ignition functions were moved to the ECU. In other words, the lack of an ignition module coincided with the introduction of the CPS. Also, the distributor hole is machined into the 2.3 all the way up to 1995, I believe, as the block itself was kept the same, with no change from 1983 to 1995. The differences in the motors are two-fold, from what I've read: 1. The changeover from carburetors to EFI. 2. The changeover from distributed power with cap, points, and rotor, to the DIS system. Lastly, if you wanted to have the 1995-up timing system, with the crank sensor and reluctor wheel on the crank, the front main seal carrier does interchange with the older blocks. The front main seal carrier is the aluminium piece where the crankshaft feeds through, and if you're not careful removing the crankshaft timing gear (for the timing belt), you will snap off the aluminum bit that the sensor mounts to -- and the timing belt gear has to be removed to not only remove the front main seal carrier, but that gear also has to be removed to remove the crank. And believe me, I snapped the original front main seal carrier on my 1992 2.3 block. Thank God a 1994 front main seal carrier interchanges with my 1992, lol.
Thanks for the info.At some point they did change to a small journal crank I just wasn't sure exactly what year they did that.i know all 2.5's got the small journal cranks
How do you run the numbers on an engine to tell what year it came from I think mine is a 79 or 80 somewhere around there not really sure I also like to know where to get a standalone distributor and a better intake for a better carburetor
Potentially, somebody more knowledgeable than I can probably confirm, but if you're running wasted spark and batch fire injection, I don't see why not. Pretty sure the pre-94/95 2.3 ran like that.
Hello friend, I hope you can help me. Until 1997, these American Rangers were sold to Brazil by importation, Ford imported and sold them to us here. 1997 was the only year that had 4 cylinders.After the years it has become a very cheap truck, 17 thousand reais "R$" good, I intend to buy one soon and do a light vacuuming preparation, here there is not much information about this engine, only the old version that equipped some cars in the oil crisis, including our version of the Ford Maverick. Without further ado, what I want to know is, what is the graduation of this camshaft? There is no information on this here and if you can help me I would appreciate it. And taking advantage, for a brave command, which rank do you indicate me? Here there is no way to legally mount turbo for because of the legislation that is very strict. Well, I await answers.
@@davesfordperformancegarage4511 The translator is bad, must have come out wrong words.Basically what I want to know is how many degrees the camshaft of this original engine has.
I assume you are referring to the stock cam. I'm not 100% sure but I think it's under .400 lift and something like 190 ° of duration at .050 lift. It is a roller cam
@@davesfordperformancegarage4511 That's exactly it, it helped me a lot, here in Brazil you can't find any information about it. It's a little bit of information. Thanks
I'm not criticizing your video bro, but you gotta look at. The fact that in many cases, most of the things that 4 engineers came up with was to make it better so so please stop criticizing everything that you see has a change for the worst. Because you don't really kfor you and for anyone that's watching that could be it. A change for the worst? What I've seen so far. It looks like they're trying to make it more efficient, so so let them show you what they have done and then make the corrections that you see, that need to be changed. That's how essenger has made. Its money is by making things different and making them better performance minded. What you're showing is doing nothing but criticizing. Everything that has been done to make those engines better. What a world of difference between me, old 2.3 Lima and a new 2.3 Lima with a dual spark plugs per cylinder that made a world of difference in that engine, so you should be looking towards what? Else can they do, but we see it today. A 2.3 l is based off of 350 horsepower plus So please stop criticizing me engine. Start looking for the good things about it. Because obviously it's a good engine because it's been used in trip. Le track racing for the last 40 years. It's not a dumb dumb engine.You just have to be smarter than it
I agree with you that the engineers are trying to make it better,but as a hot rodder it makes things difficult at times with changing this . Obviously you didn't see my other videos I've with a 2.3l turbo 1963 falcon,I love these little motors. I also have an 1986 svo mustang
Problem with engineers is....they are smart......but common sense is lacking sometimes. Ike no practical experience of working on anything they decide to design.. Almost as if they have a built in ftm part of their brain.
I like the comparison video of the older and newer 2.3 engines. I'll be putting a turbo 2.3 in my ranger on my channel this summer!
6:53
The eternal struggle of a Ford Fan like myself.
It's a true love/hate relationship with their engineers.
Some stuff is cleverly designed and ingenious, some stuff just feels like the engineers were betting each other how convoluted they could make a part!
So true
That tube is held in with a o ring and pulls out with a little force
Hello, do you know what that switch is next to where the lower intake manifold installed. You can see it at 6:24 at the top right again at 8:32 on the right of your hand
Nor sure which one your talking about. But the one towards the back of the motor close to the bellhousing I think is a coolant temp and the one towards the front of the motor that goes in to the back side of the auxiliary shaft sprocket I think is like a "cam position sensor". Hope this helps
Good little engines, have a few myself.
Good video. Can you tell me what color the wire is that goes to the oil sending unit and the temperature unit? And maybe a picture of how that harness is mounted? 🤔
Sorry I can not
Hi Dave, I'm trying to find the coolant temp sensor on my 2007 Ranger with the 2.3 engine and when I watch videos of where it is they don't show the engine in my truck. My engine doesn't have any sensor mounted at the front or near the thermostat housing nor in the cylinder head, can you help? It's a twin overhead cam engine I think.
The 2007 is a completely different motor than the old 2.3 lima motors
Actually, the 1998-2001 2.5s have the same main bearing journals as a 2.3 Lima.
I know this because I am actually in the process of tearing down a 2.3, got that done, then went to a junkyard to grab the internals out of a 2.5, only to find out that the motor was blown. I did, however, get the crank, lay it in the '94 block I have, and there is no difference between the main journals on the 2.5 crank, and the '94 block.
Where the main difference is that the wrist pin sits a bit different between generations of the engine, which I will have to check when I eventually get the block back together, since the 2.5 crank has a 7mm increase in stroke.
The Cam Position Sensor was installed on 1995+ models, because the computer was changed from a 60-pin ECU to a 104-pin ECU. How you know you have a 1995 or newer truck/engine? The Ignition Module that was located on 1989-1994 models, on the intake manifold, was eliminated when ignition functions were moved to the ECU. In other words, the lack of an ignition module coincided with the introduction of the CPS.
Also, the distributor hole is machined into the 2.3 all the way up to 1995, I believe, as the block itself was kept the same, with no change from 1983 to 1995. The differences in the motors are two-fold, from what I've read:
1. The changeover from carburetors to EFI.
2. The changeover from distributed power with cap, points, and rotor, to the DIS system.
Lastly, if you wanted to have the 1995-up timing system, with the crank sensor and reluctor wheel on the crank, the front main seal carrier does interchange with the older blocks. The front main seal carrier is the aluminium piece where the crankshaft feeds through, and if you're not careful removing the crankshaft timing gear (for the timing belt), you will snap off the aluminum bit that the sensor mounts to -- and the timing belt gear has to be removed to not only remove the front main seal carrier, but that gear also has to be removed to remove the crank. And believe me, I snapped the original front main seal carrier on my 1992 2.3 block. Thank God a 1994 front main seal carrier interchanges with my 1992, lol.
Thanks for the info.At some point they did change to a small journal crank I just wasn't sure exactly what year they did that.i know all 2.5's got the small journal cranks
How do you run the numbers on an engine to tell what year it came from I think mine is a 79 or 80 somewhere around there not really sure I also like to know where to get a standalone distributor and a better intake for a better carburetor
Can I run the 2.3 on the crank sensor alone?
Potentially, somebody more knowledgeable than I can probably confirm, but if you're running wasted spark and batch fire injection, I don't see why not.
Pretty sure the pre-94/95 2.3 ran like that.
Do you think a Turbo will be easy to mount to that engine?
It has already been mounted and been running. It wasn't to bad fitting it into the car.
Easy project, I have a turbo Ranger myself. 1996 with a 1997 2.3.
Did you see my other videos of my 1963 falcon 2.3L turbo
Cut the bracket ,then reweld. I'm sure they didn't do that long 🌞
Hello friend, I hope you can help me. Until 1997, these American Rangers were sold to Brazil by importation, Ford imported and sold them to us here. 1997 was the only year that had 4 cylinders.After the years it has become a very cheap truck, 17 thousand reais "R$" good, I intend to buy one soon and do a light vacuuming preparation, here there is not much information about this engine, only the old version that equipped some cars in the oil crisis, including our version of the Ford Maverick. Without further ado, what I want to know is, what is the graduation of this camshaft? There is no information on this here and if you can help me I would appreciate it. And taking advantage, for a brave command, which rank do you indicate me? Here there is no way to legally mount turbo for because of the legislation that is very strict. Well, I await answers.
What do you mean? I don't what you mean by graduation of the cam.
@@davesfordperformancegarage4511 The translator is bad, must have come out wrong words.Basically what I want to know is how many degrees the camshaft of this original engine has.
I assume you are referring to the stock cam. I'm not 100% sure but I think it's under .400 lift and something like 190 ° of duration at .050 lift. It is a roller cam
@@davesfordperformancegarage4511 That's exactly it, it helped me a lot, here in Brazil you can't find any information about it. It's a little bit of information. Thanks
$75 bucks??? I would give you $100 for the whole thing!!
I'm not criticizing your video bro, but you gotta look at. The fact that in many cases, most of the things that 4 engineers came up with was to make it better so so please stop criticizing everything that you see has a change for the worst. Because you don't really kfor you and for anyone that's watching that could be it. A change for the worst? What I've seen so far. It looks like they're trying to make it more efficient, so so let them show you what they have done and then make the corrections that you see, that need to be changed. That's how essenger has made. Its money is by making things different and making them better performance minded. What you're showing is doing nothing but criticizing. Everything that has been done to make those engines better. What a world of difference between me, old 2.3 Lima and a new 2.3 Lima with a dual spark plugs per cylinder that made a world of difference in that engine, so you should be looking towards what? Else can they do, but we see it today. A 2.3 l is based off of 350 horsepower plus
So please stop criticizing me engine. Start looking for the good things about it. Because obviously it's a good engine because it's been used in trip. Le track racing for the last 40 years. It's not a dumb dumb engine.You just have to be smarter than it
I agree with you that the engineers are trying to make it better,but as a hot rodder it makes things difficult at times with changing this . Obviously you didn't see my other videos I've with a 2.3l turbo 1963 falcon,I love these little motors. I also have an 1986 svo mustang
Problem with engineers is....they are smart......but common sense is lacking sometimes. Ike no practical experience of working on anything they decide to design.. Almost as if they have a built in ftm part of their brain.