Building a Turbo Duratec. 2.0 or 2.3?

If one was going to build a turbo Duratec, would it be better to start with a 2.0 or 2.3?(In other words, how would YOU do it, with YOUR money?)

Yes its for a Xratty.

At what sorta power level? Seems to me that unless you really need the extra oomph from the stroke on the 2.3, the 2L version might be more affordable. Lot of cores in the form of Focii, forged crank available at OEM-scale pricing in the form of the 09+ Miata one. It seems like (from just looking at Wiseco's catalog, pick your own preferred bits) both have off-the-shelf-available forged rods and pistons.

I might be a bit of a conservative mindset regarding internals though. It honestly doesn't seem like there's a hell of a lot to choose from between the two, but the time I looked I was leaning towards the 2L. I'm not an expert though!

Quote
mekilljoydammit
At what sorta power level? Seems to me that unless you really need the extra oomph from the stroke on the 2.3, the 2L version might be more affordable. Lot of cores in the form of Focii, forged crank available at OEM-scale pricing in the form of the 09+ Miata one. It seems like (from just looking at Wiseco's catalog, pick your own preferred bits) both have off-the-shelf-available forged rods and pistons.

I might be a bit of a conservative mindset regarding internals though. It honestly doesn't seem like there's a hell of a lot to choose from between the two, but the time I looked I was leaning towards the 2L. I'm not an expert though!

Well I'm a ex-spurt and even know these motors well, so.....

I know his car (I ought to its sitting on some barrow brand new gravel length suspenders of mine!!) and I say I know how good they go with a YB at 2.0..
On the other hand there's no drawbacks to the 2.3 version..

Agreed for Adam he wants rods, probably a steel crank, but I would sure hope he doesn't go for shelf-stock Wisecos...
There are better pistons and with CP Pistons I can specify a lot of things "we' (me and them) have foundf on like works spec YB pistons --esoecially in the shape and size and contour of the dish....very different than production YBG Mahle pistons...
Stuff clearly intended to mitigate against detonation....
I cannot do that with Wiseco...
He's not a silly boy so that means it's going to run on the best pump gas he can, but its still pump, so we want to do everything we can to minimze the risk for det.

So whatever falls in the lap..
Hell he could just get one of the 2 2300 cores I already have----if a certain somebody hasn't lost everything or left them out in the rain.

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

From quick poking around it seems like it's spendy to get a steel crank in a 2.3 Duratec; the turbo Mazda version apparently is steel, but also supposedly different rod, main journal dimensions, and even stroke, so NFG. I'm not sure how much of a drawback dealing with the Ranger iron crank is; there's some roadrace guys supposedly making it work pretty well, but roadrace ain't rally.

And yeah, I full well suspected there's better pistons and rods than what Wiseco sells; it's just nice and quick to look at one manufacturer to see if such a class of items exists in general before ya get to custom configurations to suit mobetta things.

But yeah, you certainly know this stuff better than me.

As for easy availability of a steel crank I win either way in my opinion. If its in a 2.0 block it all bolts up fine. If its in a taller, 2.3 block well it looks like I have a really nice long-rod motor. Thats assuming I get to the point of "needing" the steel crank.

The application would likely help. I've been talking to a friend of mine in the Chicago area as well as John over the past year or two about this very swap. So I've had alot of time to think about cost and its affect on gas money and marriages. LOL The build will start like at reasonable 300-350RWHP level, likely with some stock-ish turbo like the T3(Cossie turbine housing? maybe) I would likely use the stock cams. I might upgrade the valves/springs. New rods and pistons are a no brainer. I would like the room to grow in my build to 400-450rwhp so if I ever get the "itch", I can simply swap a turbo, some injectors, and go tune for it and be there.

The car will be a street car, a FUN, fast one. I'm here asking about it because :
-I like rally racing
-Rally guys are cheap and like to go fast/reliably(just like me) despite the fact that is actually impossible.
-Rally guys are open minded and problem solvers instead of being fanboys.

John is also correct, I WILL be running pump gas, ALL the time, unless I just want to get a whiff of race gas exhaust fumes(haha.) This means 93 octane for the most part, 94 being available occasionally, and sometimes being forced to use 92. I am unsure where to go with compression ratios. I'm thinking 8.5:1 or maybe 9:1 would be ideal, though 9:1 might be a bit much for the higher power goals on pump gas?

Finally yes my car is on borrowed struts, when I get home one of my first priorities will be swapping them out for the full strength models, and maybe testing some new wide springs technology that lets me have wider wheels? How about it John?

I also need to figure out a log header for this thing.

Quote
john vanlandingham

He's not a silly boy so that means it's going to run on the best pump gas he can, but its still pump, so we want to do everything we can to minimze the risk for det.

Is there a general rule of thumb that applies to what compression levels should have a certain octane of fuel at a minimum?

---

Kirk Coughlin
Woodbury, MN and River Falls, WI

Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est.

Quote
darkknight9

Quote
john vanlandingham

He's not a silly boy so that means it's going to run on the best pump gas he can, but its still pump, so we want to do everything we can to minimze the risk for det.

Is there a general rule of thumb that applies to what compression levels should have a certain octane of fuel at a minimum?

Best as I can tell this is mostly a can of worms that involves experience and quite a bit of self taught engineering/science to figure out.

If indeed its a can of worms, lets go fishing.

I'm unfamiliar with any gas stations short of ones near racetracks that sell pump gas higher than 91-93 octane... and my limited experience says that no auto manufacturer (again, that I am aware of) is running much higher compression than 10:1.

If anyone else knows of a massed produced car that runs higher compression on the 91-93 gas chime in...

As for the 2 or 2.3 John posted on a thread that I cant find at the moment some info about gains that could be achieved by boring over or increasing stroke.... and which ones were worthwhile... the cylinder wall thickness of the 2.3 is supposedly more than .050 greater than the 2.0. The 2.3 can take the ranger crank which ends up being multiple pounds lighter than the stock crank.

If weight is at an absolute premium, use the 2.0 with a 2.3 cylinder head and boost it silly.

I'm picking up bits and pieces as I go along about this engine family. I just wish there was more data out there and available and that there was more detailed info on other engine families also.

---

Kirk Coughlin
Woodbury, MN and River Falls, WI

Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est.

http://www.turborangerforums.com/index.php

Its turning into the turboford.org of Duratecs. Seriously. Lots of info and builds slowly gaining momentum.

Another cool thing you can move things like the alternator and a/c compressor around without new brackets as they mount directly to the block.

I already have the intake manifold I want to try. The MX5 Miata intake manifold. I am working on getting a custom oil pan and turbo manifold made as we speak. Im probably going to run a megasquirt with a custom harness for my engine management. I'm hoping standard bosch style injectors fit the fuel rail/manifold.

Im trying to build this in a way someone with a semi-limited budget might. In other words if you would consider building a 2.3 Lima engine or perhaps buying a YB I want to show that this engine is a viable contender. And lose weight off the front of my car and get better gas mileage.

Quote
darkknight9

Quote

If indeed its a can of worms, lets go fishing.

I'm unfamiliar with any gas stations short of ones near racetracks that sell pump gas higher than 91-93 octane... and my limited experience says that no auto manufacturer (again, that I am aware of) is running much higher compression than 10:1.

If anyone else knows of a massed produced car that runs higher compression on the 91-93 gas chime in...

christ things have been in the high 10s since the 90s and some are over 11.

Quote

As for the 2 or 2.3 John posted on a thread that I cant find at the moment some info about gains that could be achieved by boring over or increasing stroke.... and which ones were worthwhile... the cylinder wall thickness of the 2.3 is supposedly more than .050 greater than the 2.0. The 2.3 can take the ranger crank which ends up being multiple pounds lighter than the stock crank.

If weight is at an absolute premium, use the 2.0 with a 2.3 cylinder head and boost it silly.

I'm picking up bits and pieces as I go along about this engine family. I just wish there was more data out there and available and that there was more detailed info on other engine families also.

Big factors are: 1) Gas octane 2) combustion chamber shape 3) quench 4) bore---how far /long does it have to go before a charge is done...5) cylinder head temp---iron? aluminum?

And don't forget compression ratio isn't the standard "static" compression, but acual, Like after intake valve closes...

In the case of the Duratec, both are same 87.5 bore, both share the same combustion chambers with nice pent roof design and central spark plug, .
so all that cancels out. So its still a matter of what you stumble across.

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

Out of curiosity, how much would a 2.0 Duratec cost? Was chatting with John earlier and it was brought up that I should sw2ap the zetec for one.

Quote
ChrisKobi
Out of curiosity, how much would a 2.0 Duratec cost? Was chatting with John earlier and it was brought up that I should sw2ap the zetec for one.

I'm sure one of the guys on here might be able to hook you up with one. If not car-part.com says $450-1150 in your neck of the woods.

---

Kirk Coughlin
Woodbury, MN and River Falls, WI

Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est.

Quote
john vanlandingham


christ things have been in the high 10s since the 90s and some are over 11.




Big factors are: 1) Gas octane 2) combustion chamber shape 3) quench 4) bore---how far /long does it have to go before a charge is done...5) cylinder head temp---iron? aluminum?

Well I, like a poorly written sci fi movie, have never left the late 80's early 90's. I still think my 95 escort is a spaceship.

There probably is an engineering limit that we haven't reached with chamber shape and materials used throughout... but no major manufacturer is going to ride too close to that edge given stupidity of humans and cost of fixing stuff. But I still think it could be used as a good approximation or at least a place to start.

Let's assume then that we're dealing with a duratec. Pump gas. Good chamber shape. 87.5 bore. Aluminum.

Before I ask how, I need to know what two things mean: What is quench (short of rapidly cooling something with water or oil) and "how far /long does it have to go before a charge is done"? Do you mean how far the piston travels on the down stroke until there is no more combustible material? Or just the time the exhaust valves are held open?

As always, thank you for the help.

---

Kirk Coughlin
Woodbury, MN and River Falls, WI

Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est.