Ford 2.3L ecoboost crate engine

[CarGuy]

Yeah, that was my point of reference - it's not fully spooled until 4500rpm and doesn't make peak power until 7000rpm. And that requires a $15,000 long block.

Or you could spend $800 on upgrading the 2.7 turbos, throw in a set of injectors, and you're good for over 600whp all day on a 2.7. I'm not seeing the advantage to the 2.3 - you're paying way more and getting way less.

May need a new fuel pump o support this.

Sponsored

 

[CarGuy]

Could also do this...with a warranty.
https://www.hennesseyperformance.com/vehicles/velociraptor-400-bronco-upgrade/

 

[BroncoAZ]

Just need a shoehorn to stuff this in.

https://performanceparts.ford.com/part/M-6007-73

 

[medguy]

Just need a shoehorn to stuff this in.

https://performanceparts.ford.com/part/M-6007-73

The funny thing is, it’s physically smaller than a coyote so it’s probably a more realistic option.

 

[Lèòn]

Just need a shoehorn to stuff this in.

https://performanceparts.ford.com/part/M-6007-73

Only if it works with the manual

 

[Brnzbronc]

Even for a LS? Its quite a bit smaller than a coyote.

It might, I would suspect there may be some structural modifications somewhere or a custom oil pan.

 

[Brnzbronc]

Yeah, that was my point of reference - it's not fully spooled until 4500rpm and doesn't make peak power until 7000rpm. And that requires a $15,000 long block.

Or you could spend $800 on upgrading the 2.7 turbos, throw in a set of injectors, and you're good for over 600whp all day on a 2.7. I'm not seeing the advantage to the 2.3 - you're paying way more and getting way less.

The 2.3 hits torque peak at 2500 rpms where as the 2.7 hits torque peak at 3500 rpms..
The 2.7 doesn’t hit peak hp till 5500 rpms where as the 2.3 hit peak hp at about 5000 rpms. The torque and hp curves on the 2.3 come on fast and holds through the rpm ranges where as the 2.7 torque starts to drop after it hits peak and hp curve is a long curve till peak. If you’re wanting an engine that has grunt and for trails the 2.3 is the way to go, if you want wide open Baja style driving the 2.7 is the way to go. 2.3 aftermarket is more readily available where as no one is supporting the 2.7 that much. Both are great engines just more of a pick your poison decision.

 

[Laminar]

The 2.3 hits torque peak at 2500 rpms where as the 2.7 hits torque peak at 3500 rpms..
The 2.7 doesn’t hit peak hp till 5500 rpms where as the 2.3 hit peak hp at about 5000 rpms. The torque and hp curves on the 2.3 come on fast and holds through the rpm ranges where as the 2.7 torque starts to drop after it hits peak and hp curve is a long curve till peak. If you’re wanting an engine that has grunt and for trails the 2.3 is the way to go, if you want wide open Baja style driving the 2.7 is the way to go.

This isn't the conversation I was having - we were talking about all-out max HP builds, not stock powerbands. But I'll play along.

Comparing torque peak RPMs without referencing actual torque output is kind of ridiculous.

"The 2.3 hits torque peak at 2500 rpms where as the 2.7 hits torque peak at 3500 rpms."

The 2.3 is generating about 200 ft-lb at 2500rpm. Most dyno plots I'm finding show it peak at 3000rpm, where it's generating about 270 ft-lb.

At 2500rpm the 2.7 is generating 250ft-lb, by 3000rpm it's making 350ft-lb. Sure, it's not fully spooled at 2500, but it's making more "grunt" than the 2.3 at an equivalent RPM. More power down low = better climbing ability, acceleration, low-end response, etc.

"The 2.7 doesn’t hit peak hp till 5500 rpms where as the 2.3 hit peak hp at about 5000 rpms"

At 5000rpm you're doing about 310 wheel hp on the 2.7 and only ~260 on the 2.3. The 2.7 makes more power sooner, and more power everywhere.

2.3 aftermarket is more readily available where as no one is supporting the 2.7 that much. Both are great engines just more of a pick your poison decision.

I'm curious to see what else you think the 2.7 needs. With nothing more than a tune on the 2.7 you can make 450+ daily-driveable horsepower to the wheels. With the currently available aftermarket parts (aka just upgraded turbos and fuel system), you can make more than 700 crank hp. What's missing? It doesn't need a block, it doesn't need rods, it doesn't need pistons, it doesn't need all of the other stuff the 2.3 needs to beef it up. What "supporting" does the 2.7 need?

Remember, the 2.7/3.0 were designed with a CGI block and closed deck to hold massive power in bone stock form. The 2.3 has a weak block and an open deck design that requires significant work to survive above 400whp. In the context of an all-out max-power build (where this thread originated), the 2.7 is the no-brainer.

 

[Brnzbronc]

This isn't the conversation I was having - we were talking about all-out max HP builds, not stock powerbands. But I'll play along.

Comparing torque peak RPMs without referencing actual torque output is kind of ridiculous.

"The 2.3 hits torque peak at 2500 rpms where as the 2.7 hits torque peak at 3500 rpms."

The 2.3 is generating about 200 ft-lb at 2500rpm. Most dyno plots I'm finding show it peak at 3000rpm, where it's generating about 270 ft-lb.

At 2500rpm the 2.7 is generating 250ft-lb, by 3000rpm it's making 350ft-lb. Sure, it's not fully spooled at 2500, but it's making more "grunt" than the 2.3 at an equivalent RPM. More power down low = better climbing ability, acceleration, low-end response, etc.

"The 2.7 doesn’t hit peak hp till 5500 rpms where as the 2.3 hit peak hp at about 5000 rpms"

At 5000rpm you're doing about 310 wheel hp on the 2.7 and only ~260 on the 2.3. The 2.7 makes more power sooner, and more power everywhere.



I'm curious to see what else you think the 2.7 needs. With nothing more than a tune on the 2.7 you can make 450+ daily-driveable horsepower to the wheels. With the currently available aftermarket parts (aka just upgraded turbos and fuel system), you can make more than 700 crank hp. What's missing? It doesn't need a block, it doesn't need rods, it doesn't need pistons, it doesn't need all of the other stuff the 2.3 needs to beef it up. What "supporting" does the 2.7 need?

Remember, the 2.7/3.0 were designed with a CGI block and closed deck to hold massive power in bone stock form. The 2.3 has a weak block and an open deck design that requires significant work to survive above 400whp. In the context of an all-out max-power build (where this thread originated), the 2.7 is the no-brainer.

There was some misunderstanding, what I was getting at was those numbers and curves are both engines making 600hp+. Stock for stock yes the 2.7 curves are better. I’ve had a tuned 2.7 F150 I already know all the ins and outs of that motor. Pistons still fail in those motors pushing that power. Running 25psi is probably the max psi for cylinder pressure for durability. The 2.3 block is not the problem it’s the piston sleeves are too close together which causes blown head gaskets and the pistons themselves sheer at the wrist pins under high loads also from (LSD) low speed detonation… A problem that all DI engines suffer from. My point is you can build and rebuild a 2.3 in no time for a fraction of the cost. Where as all you can do with the 2.7 is source from a junk your a 2.7 or spend 8k for a new crate motor.

 

[Laminar]

There was some misunderstanding, what I was getting at was those numbers and curves are both engines making 600hp+.

Please please please share your dyno plots. Here's a 2.3 making 400hp, spools by 3000rpm.

Here's one making 500hp, it's not spooled until 4500rpm:

You have a 600hp 2.3 that hits torque peak by 2500rpm?? I don't think physics supports that, but I'm open to seeing a dyno plot. 600hp at 7000rpm is 450ft-lb. Making 450+ft-lb by 2500rpm with enough capacity to avoid turbo overspeed at 7000+rpm would be...impressive. Stock EcoBoosts make big torque down low because they have tiny turbos that fall off after 5000rpm. If you optimize for high end flow (max power), you HAVE to lose the low end. You can play with perfecting A/Rs and twin scroll setups and optimizing efficiency but a 600hp setup just straight up can't spool like a 300hp setup.

Pistons still fail in those motors pushing that power. Running 25psi is probably the max psi for cylinder pressure for durability.

Care to share some info on this? I'd love to see some failures.

The 2.3 block is not the problem it’s the piston sleeves are too close together which causes blown head gaskets and the pistons themselves sheer at the wrist pins

Can you share a 2.3 long block built for 600+ horsepower that doesn't include any kind of block strengthening or closed deck conversion?

SP63 uses a 2.0 block.
https://www.speedperf6rmanc3.com/pr...block-for-ford-focus-rs-2-3l-rated-700hp.html

Livernois does a closed-deck conversion.
https://www.livernoismotorsports.co...orts-ford-2-3l-ecoboost-pro-series-shortblock

Mountune offers a closed-deck conversion.
https://mountuneusa.com/products/mo...l-focus-rs-short-block?variant=40442965622851

My point is you can build and rebuild a 2.3 in no time for a fraction of the cost. Where as all you can do with the 2.7 is source from a junk your a 2.7 or spend 8k for a new crate motor.

What's the cost for a 600hp-capable 2.3? Block improvements, rods, pistons, crankshaft, machine work + time? $2500 for parts + the base engine + all of the machine work and time? You could try and convince me that you could get a fully built 2.3 for under $4500 but I'd have a hard time believing you.

What's the cost for a 600hp-capable 2.7? Aka stock everything. I got mine for $2200 from the junkyard. New OEM cranks are $250, offset-cap cracked rods are $35, etc.

 

[Brnzbronc]

Please please please share your dyno plots. Here's a 2.3 making 400hp, spools by 3000rpm.

Here's one making 500hp, it's not spooled until 4500rpm:

You have a 600hp 2.3 that hits torque peak by 2500rpm?? I don't think physics supports that, but I'm open to seeing a dyno plot. 600hp at 7000rpm is 450ft-lb. Making 450+ft-lb by 2500rpm with enough capacity to avoid turbo overspeed at 7000+rpm would be...impressive. Stock EcoBoosts make big torque down low because they have tiny turbos that fall off after 5000rpm. If you optimize for high end flow (max power), you HAVE to lose the low end. You can play with perfecting A/Rs and twin scroll setups and optimizing efficiency but a 600hp setup just straight up can't spool like a 300hp setup.



Care to share some info on this? I'd love to see some failures.



Can you share a 2.3 long block built for 600+ horsepower that doesn't include any kind of block strengthening or closed deck conversion?

SP63 uses a 2.0 block.
https://www.speedperf6rmanc3.com/pr...block-for-ford-focus-rs-2-3l-rated-700hp.html

Livernois does a closed-deck conversion.
https://www.livernoismotorsports.co...orts-ford-2-3l-ecoboost-pro-series-shortblock

Mountune offers a closed-deck conversion.
https://mountuneusa.com/products/mo...l-focus-rs-short-block?variant=40442965622851



What's the cost for a 600hp-capable 2.3? Block improvements, rods, pistons, crankshaft, machine work + time? $2500 for parts + the base engine + all of the machine work and time? You could try and convince me that you could get a fully built 2.3 for under $4500 but I'd have a hard time believing you.

What's the cost for a 600hp-capable 2.7? Aka stock everything. I got mine for $2200 from the junkyard. New OEM cranks are $250, offset-cap cracked rods are $35, etc.

$2200 to build a 600 hp 2.7 hahah you are talking out your ass.
Stage 4 turbos - $3200
High flow pump- $2500 right there after taxes your at 6 grand… plus the $2200 junk yard motor you have to buy and new turbos if you smoke a piston..

I can build a 2.3 for 4 grand complete.. not buying off the shelf motor I know this cause I’ve done it, and now helping my buddy build his 2.3 mustang.

 

[Brnzbronc]

Full stock setup for the 2.7 can only net you 400-450 the fuel system taps out and so does the turbos

 

[CarGuy]

Just need a shoehorn to stuff this in.

https://performanceparts.ford.com/part/M-6007-73

I prefer an LS from Chevy.

 

[Tex]

This is a fun thread

 

[Laminar]

$2200 to build a 600 hp 2.7 hahah you are talking out your ass.
Stage 4 turbos - $3200
High flow pump- $2500 right there after taxes your at 6 grand… plus the $2200 junk yard motor you have to buy and new turbos if you smoke a piston..

High flow pump? Not with dual injection. Stock fuel system supports plenty of power, and if you need more just throw in some bigger port injectors.

Stage 4 turbos are $2450.

Completely stock fuel system:

I can build a 2.3 for 4 grand complete.. not buying off the shelf motor I know this cause I’ve done it, and now helping my buddy build his 2.3 mustang.

Does the 4 grand include fuel system and turbo? You included those above. The EFR 8374 kit runs $3000+ and new injectors (no fuel pump) are $1300+. Your "4 grand" engine is now $8000+ to actually make the power you're claiming.

Plus, my buddies and I could throw a big ass turbo on a junkyard LS and make 1500hp. That doesn't mean it's done right and designed for longevity. That's why I asked for a vendor (you know, someone that has to take responsibility when something goes wrong) that would put 600hp through an unmodified 2.3 block.

You're really making my point for me here - not spooled until 4500rpm, just like I said. And just like always, people are getting wrapped up in peak number contests. Look at that dyno, then scroll up to the 2.7 dyno. What's more important in a Bronco? Peak power production at 7000rpm or power under the curve?

The 2.3 hits torque peak at 2500 rpms

Full stock setup for the 2.7 can only net you 400-450 the fuel system taps out

hahah you are talking out your ass.

Careful about what accusations you're throwing around. Still waiting on that dyno, and I'd love to see some melted pistons.

Sponsored