Ford Ranger Forum - Forums for Ford Ranger enthusiasts!

Go Back   Ford Ranger Forum - Forums for Ford Ranger enthusiasts! > >
Forgot Password? Join Us!

Welcome to Ford Ranger Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread

  #1  
Old 02-08-2011, 04:11 PM
Gumcrew2 Gumcrew2 is offline
Ford Tough
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 287
Default Tired But True 2.3L

First Post! Hi everyone!



I recently picked up a 1983 Ranger with the 2.3L. Has 179K on the truck 113K on the block according to previous owner. Motor runs great but burns a tremendous amount of oil. Forced to add a quart about every 60-80 MINUTES of run time (regardless of distance travelled).

Oil is not leaking onto the ground anywhere though their is oil residue on the bell housing. NOT A DROP every sees the ground. SO I'm assuming it's burning a LOT of it. It failed emissions, specifically Hydrocarbons were at about 8.7, limit it 6.0., not surprised burning that much oil.

Coolant is perfect green and the truck started when it was -35* in Breck last week no problem.


MY QUESTION:
What should I do from here?
1: Re-Ring the current block (with block in truck)
2: Swap in a different 2.3L, if so what years will swap block/head? (not going Turbo or EFI)
3: Swap in a different small 4cyl block with the same bellhousing/clutch pattern.
4: Rig up an oil-injection system from the cab to the valve cover.


My main goal for the truck is keeping it CHEAP to do (it'll be USED block for sure if I go opt 2 or 3, only parts I'd be buying would be a re-ring kit if I go opt1).
And better gas mileage. (its getting 18mpg now, not to impressed)


Thanks for the input.

-Saul
__________________
'83 Ford Ranger 2.3L 4Spd, Dual Tanks, 195/60R15's, Welded Rear End TOTALLED AT 483,211 MILES
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-08-2011, 04:32 PM
DiabloBlanco DiabloBlanco is offline
Get Lifted.
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,402
Default Re: Tired But True 2.3L

welcome to the forums!

might be the main seal, or bad rings. Is there alot of black smokke coming outta the exhaust?
__________________
YZ the way to be!
The Brotherhood!

Mods to come: Camburg entry 6.0 system. FiberwerkX Fenders and bedsides. Tube bumper.
R.I.P. Jeff Ashton. 1992-2011
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-08-2011, 04:49 PM
Bird76Mojo Bird76Mojo is offline
troll extraordinaire
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 536
Default Re: Tired But True 2.3L

Quote:
Originally Posted by DiabloBlanco View Post
welcome to the forums!

might be the main seal, or bad rings. Is there alot of black smokke coming outta the exhaust?
Don't you mean blue smoke...



GB
__________________
2001 Ranger Edge Regular cab, auto 4.0L 4x4 4.10LS

1989 Ranger Regular cab longbed, manual 2.9 4x4

Parts BroncoII's x 3
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-08-2011, 05:05 PM
DiabloBlanco DiabloBlanco is offline
Get Lifted.
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,402
Default Re: Tired But True 2.3L

blue, you are right. durrr
__________________
YZ the way to be!
The Brotherhood!

Mods to come: Camburg entry 6.0 system. FiberwerkX Fenders and bedsides. Tube bumper.
R.I.P. Jeff Ashton. 1992-2011
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-09-2011, 08:01 AM
Gumcrew2 Gumcrew2 is offline
Ford Tough
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 287
Default Re: Tired But True 2.3L

no serious smoke
I know what you mean about blue smoke from shot rings: Its not, its BLACK.

When I started it up at -20* this morning it left a black tracer in the snow by the exhaust pipe tip about 8" long. NO blue at all, just sooty like not burning well, carbon (carb problems?)
__________________
'83 Ford Ranger 2.3L 4Spd, Dual Tanks, 195/60R15's, Welded Rear End TOTALLED AT 483,211 MILES
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-09-2011, 08:05 AM
terryduanemiller terryduanemiller is offline
www.shanewootenband.com
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,896
Default Re: Tired But True 2.3L

blue is oil, black is excessive fuel, it's loading up..
__________________
MY BUILD THREAD
1999 MAZDA 2500SE, 2.5L 4-clanger, 5 speed, Green n slow. Rangers as daily drivers since 1988.
ASE Certified Mechanic, Builder of Show Destroying Protouring and Classic cars..
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-09-2011, 08:12 AM
Gumcrew2 Gumcrew2 is offline
Ford Tough
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 287
Default Re: Tired But True 2.3L

Quote:
Originally Posted by terryduanemiller View Post
blue is oil, black is excessive fuel, it's loading up..
Driving around with ~500lb (FULL bed of snow/level), I get 18mpg. I figured it was just pretty low due to excessive idling/warm up time and the weight in the cold weather.

In addition: I know lean runs HOT (a melted piston taught me that), and this motor runs COLD. Not sure if the previous owner removed the thermostat or what but I have yet to see it get above the "C" line more than 1/8". Even going from 6k ft-11k ft in 3rdgear(50mph) the whole way.


I'm leaning more towards rear main seal, but it would have to be a pretty catastrophic failure for the quantity/rate of loss of oil I'm seeing. The transmission bellhousing is COVERED (looks like it has been for a while). But I'm hard pressed to say it's a rear main leaking THAT bad and not dripping down off the pan as well.
__________________
'83 Ford Ranger 2.3L 4Spd, Dual Tanks, 195/60R15's, Welded Rear End TOTALLED AT 483,211 MILES
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-15-2011, 08:32 PM
KHB1 KHB1 is offline
Learning to use the forums
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 9
Thumbs up Re: Tired But True 2.3L

[B]I hope this will help your decision.

THANKS TO
http://www.therangerstation.com/foru...?t=6427&page=2
Ford’s 2.0/2.3/2.5 litre engine family

These motors are commonly referred to as either the Lima or simply the 2.X OHC (Over Head Cam) engines. They started life based on the German designed 2.0 EAO Sport motors that were first introduced to this country in the Mercury Capri’s from the early 70’s. They share nothing with the 2.3-2.5 litre HSC motors that were offered in the passenger car line from ’84-’91. Initially the 2.3 was supposed to be designed so that the 2.0 EAO parts would interchange, but due to different manufacturing processes it was not feasable) according to Ford, a couple of easy ways to tell if you have a 2.0L EAO engine, or a 2.0/2.3/2/5L lima engine is that the 2.0 EAO engine has 10 valve cover bolts while the Lima engine has only 8 valve cover bolts, and the distributor is in front of the number 1 intake port on the EAO engine, while the distributor is under the number 1 intake port on the Lima engine. The 2.3 first debuted in the 1974 Pinto using a progressive 2Bbl Webber/Holley carb and a points distributor. In ’75 they were upgraded to a Duraspark ignition system. They remained unchanged until about ’81 when the intake ports were changed from an oval to a D shape (flat floor). The 2.0/2.3 litre versions that were offered in Rangers starting in ’83 used a different head having four evenly spaced round holes of equal size. A 2.0 litre 1-bbl carbed version was offered in Rangers from ’83-’85, and in ’87-’88 with a 2-bbl in some parts of the US, Canada and Mexico. EFI was added to the engines in ’85. In ’89 the 2.3 was changed to a DIS (Distributorless Ignition System) ignition utilizing a new 8-plug head. This head had larger evenly spaced D-shaped intake ports and was used until the end of production of the 2.5 in ‘01. The 2.5 litre version was only offered from ‘98 To ’01, when the engine was replaced by a 2.3 litre DOHC Duratec based engine.

In ’79-‘81 a high compression drawthru carb’ed turbo version of the 2.3 was offered. In ’83-‘88 a lower compression EFI turbo version was offered in T-birds, Cougars, Mustang SVOs and Merkur XR4Ti’s (through ’89).

Some of the changes to the motor over the years were:
Rear main seal changed from a two piece to a one piece design in ’86.
Roller cams were installed from ’88 on in Rangers and ’91 on in Mustangs.
Crankshaft main journal sizes were reduced starting in ’88.
CPS (Cam Position Sensor) was added starting in ’95 (’94 in California). At this time Ford changed to a 104-pin computer (it was a 60-pin) and moved the DIS functions into the computer, previously the DIS system had a TFI module as a separate unit mounted on the front of the intake manifold.

Major engine specs are
.......................................2.0........ .2.3 Early....2.3 Late.....2.5
Bore...............................3.520........3. 780.........3.780......3.780
Stroke............................3.126........3.1 26.........3.126......3.401
Bore Spacing...................4.173........4.173...... ...4.173......4.173
Main Journal Dia..............2.3986......2.3986.......2.2055.. ....2.2055
Rod Journal Dia...............2.0468......2.0468.......2.0468. ....2.0468
Con. Rod Length..............5.2047......5.2047.......5.204 7.....5.457
Crank Center to deck.......8.368........8.368.........8.368......8 .368
Piston pin height...............1.583........1.583.........1. 583.....1.2105

Differences between major engine parts are as follows:
Blocks-
2.0 is an underbored 2.3, with the exception of the bore the blocks are identical to all 2.3’s (note the ranger 2.0 block can not be bored out to accept a 2.3 pistons).
’75-’88 2.3’s are interchangeable.
’89-’94 same as ’83-’88 2.3’s but have a smaller main journal saddle, the oil pan seal surface was changed in ‘87 to eliminate the 4 piece seal and holes were added in the front to bolt on the DIS’s crank trigger assembly.
’95-‘01 similar to the ’89-‘95’s but a Cam Position Sensor was added behind the aux sprocket, the hole for the distributor was eliminated and the oil pump was moved in place of the aux. shaft itself.
Turbo blocks are identical to the ’83-’88 Ranger blocks but have an additional boss w/ a hole threaded in the pass. side about ½ way back that provides a place to drain the lubricating oil back into the engine from the turbo.

Cranks-
2.0 and early 2.3 Lima cranks are identical.
Late 2.3 Lima cranks have smaller main journals.
2.5 Lima cranks are identical to 2.3 Lima except they have a longer stroke.
Rods-
2.0 and 2.3 (including turbo) rods are identical up through at least ’94. In fact they still have the original D4 (’74) casting number on them.
Pistons-
The 2.0 pistons are unique and don’t interchange.
The 2.3 pistons are all the same excluding the turbo versions, which were forged. Low compression (8.0-1) in the ’83-‘88’s and high compression (9.0-1) in the ’79-‘81’s.
The 2.5 pistons are similar to the 2.3’s but have a different wrist pin height.

Heads-
All 2.0/2.3/2.5 heads will physically bolt in place of each other, they all have similar exhaust port shape and placement. All cams are interchangeable as long as they are used with the proper followers. Later model ('95 and newer) roller cam followers cannot be easily swapped onto an older head as the valve stem size was reduced in the newer heads and matching slot in the follower was reduced, the 83-88 2.0 carburated Ranger engine and 2.3 carburated Ranger engines have the same small round intake ports spaced evenly apart, they differ from each other in their valve sizes though.

There are several variations on the 2.3 heads though they break down into 4 distinct types:
1. Passenger car oval port heads-’74-’80 Mustang, Pinto, Fairmont, Bobcat, etc.
2. Passenger car D-port head-’81-’95? T-bird, Mustang, Etc.
3. Truck round port- ’83-’88 carburated Ranger
4. Truck D-port- ’89-’01 Ranger. The '89-'94's and '95-'01's have different combustion chambers and ports.

Roller Camshafts
'88-'94 Ranger Roller cam .215" lift at lobe. Lobe is .675 wide
Follower's roller diameter is .900"
'95-'01 Ranger Roller cam .215" lift at lobe. Lobe is .510 wide
Follower's roller diameter is .900"

Head gasket for turbo or any Lima engine (0-27psi)- Fel-pro #1035
Recommended Valve Seals (Good for N/A too)
Intake- E7ZZ-6571-A
Exhaust- E7ZZ-6571-B

Cylinder Head Flow Numbers
D=d-port / T-D= turbo d-port / L-dual= 97-01 dual plug /
E-dual= 88-96 dual plug / Ess-D= Esslinger ported d-port/

inches D T-D Oval Round L-dual E-dual Ess-D ported ARCA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
.050"---27.55--27.8---28.6---31.0---30.0---27.3---28.1---33.2---33.7
.100"---48.9---54.5---55.9---59.0---58.0---54.9---51.4---65.6---61.3
.150"---61.8---75.4---78.9---77.7---86.7---78.3---76.7--106.5---91.6
.200"---75.2--100.6--100.3--101.6--110.7---96.1--105.5--138.8--122.0
.250"---88.0--120.7--122.3--122.0--130.3--109.4--132.3--169.3--149.8
.300"--101.6--132.3--136.8--135.5--143.3--120.4--156.3--196.5--175.8
.350"--116.5--140.1--146.6--142.7--153.1--128.4--177.7--218.6--198.5
.400"--131.0--144.0--150.5--145.3--158.9--132.3--190.7--234.8--218.6
.450"--144.0--149.2--153.1--145.9--164.1--134.9--199.8--247.1--236.1
.500"--151.8--154.4--156.9--149.2--166.8--136.8--205.6--250.4--252.3
.550"--158.2--159.5--156.3--150.5--168.8--138.8--210.1---------265.9
.600"--163.4--160.8--156.3--151.8--170.2--140.1--214.7---------275.0
.650"----------------------------------------------206.9---------283.1
.700"----------------------------------------------207.6---------290.2

Alot of information from Jspafford is included in this post

KHB1
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-16-2011, 12:28 AM
Gumcrew2 Gumcrew2 is offline
Ford Tough
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 287
Default Re: Tired But True 2.3L

Holy information load!

Thank you very much,

looks like my motor is in a little better shape than expected, just needs some oil seals and I might be good to go (cam seal is apparently shot, PUKING oil).
__________________
'83 Ford Ranger 2.3L 4Spd, Dual Tanks, 195/60R15's, Welded Rear End TOTALLED AT 483,211 MILES
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
my 85 ranger with tired v8 totalyradford Vehicle Videos 4 11-08-2011 11:43 AM
Is this true? EMB1230 General Ford Ranger Discussion 3 10-16-2010 10:41 AM
Tired of searching, help me find a good winter tire. DrIftKi7Vg Wheels and Tires 16 10-06-2010 06:13 AM
Tired old v-6 JamesCAR92 8-Cylinder Tech 1 07-16-2010 01:28 PM
Tired of the crappy ride ranger101 Vehicle Snapshots 8 04-02-2010 01:05 PM