Author |
Topic: 2.0 manifold (Read 882 times) |
|
sierra20
Junior Member
I'm a YaBB newbie!
Posts: 83
|
 |
2.0 manifold
« on: Dec 31st, 2008, 9:50pm » |
 Quote  Modify
|
thinking of fitting the 2.0 manifold to my 2.3, apart from the advantage of getting rid of the plastic manifold, are there any peerformance benifits to fitting it, and what parts do ineed apart from the manifold, intake box and the 2 pipes that com off it to the throttle body
thanks
|
|
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
pinto
Full Member
TD04 on a galaxy manifold ? whooooooosh !
Posts: 474
|
|
Re: 2.0 manifold
« Reply #1 on: Jan 1st, 2009, 11:54am » |
Quote Modify
|
Yep 
Flow for a start - the 2.0 has twin 50mm TBs compared to the Single 68mm TB of the 2.3. Couple that to a K&N or Green element in the standard box (or better still, a cone filter - but that requires a lot more work than just pulling out the airbox and sticking it in to do the job properly) and you have much better air going in.
Having not done the conversion myself (yet) im not totally sure what extras you'll need - but my advice is to make sure you take everything from the 2.0 donor you can - pipework, tubing... even the multiplugs on the sensors (with a good length of loom attached) as you can guarantee that they'll have put everything in different places and that extra 6 inches comes in when you have to solder everything together.
IIRC, there are some issues with pipework that require the use of t-pieces tosplit /join feeds for the water, etc - just be methodical and plan for problems ahead
Oh, and when you do it... take pics and post it all ! How to guides are invaluable 
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
sierra20
Junior Member
I'm a YaBB newbie!
Posts: 83
|
|
Re: 2.0 manifold
« Reply #2 on: Jan 1st, 2009, 1:34pm » |
Quote Modify
|
cheers for that, i have got the manifold and airbox and pipes coming, but do the sensors have different plugs on them?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
scorpio_man
Administrator
Ford Kuga awd
Posts: 5654
|
|
Re: 2.0 manifold
« Reply #3 on: Jan 1st, 2009, 3:00pm » |
Quote Modify
|
hi there
iirc, the idle by pass valve connection is at a different angle to the 2.3.  not much of a issue, though.
also remember something about it idling a bit faster (1k rpm?).
BTW, the lowdown torque will be less as that was the reason in the use of the plastic manifold, iirc.
hth
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Matt
Senior Member
Manual'd and a 4.0 in the making
Posts: 2816
|
|
Re: 2.0 manifold
« Reply #4 on: Jan 1st, 2009, 5:50pm » |
Quote Modify
|
hey, got you PM
As the guys already said, pipe work, better flow and a better feel, just be prepaird to dislocate your wrist to get some of the vaccume lines on  . The estate i did it on is no longer with us, (box went, as did drive shafts) or you could of come round and had a look at the setup
as for the loss of torque, i didnt really notice it tbh, the better flow of the twin 50's off sets the loss IMO. the old buss had no problems getting off the mark anyway
if needed the 2.0 head fits the 2.3 no proplem aswell. i fitted the complete 2.0 top end on my 2.3 as the head had cracked
|
|
IP Logged |
 
FDS2000 Scans - Birmingham
|
|
|
pinto
Full Member
TD04 on a galaxy manifold ? whooooooosh !
Posts: 474
|
|
Re: 2.0 manifold
« Reply #5 on: Jan 1st, 2009, 5:59pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Have the head skimmed a little and fit the Escort RS2000 cams to make the engine produce the power it should of
"actual" output of the 2300 DOHC should have been around 180bhp, but ford in their wisdom chose a pitiful CR and detuned it - more than likely to boost sales of the the 2.9 12v and cossie varients
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Tompion
Administrator
1997 2.3 Ultima estate.
Posts: 2918
|
|
Re: 2.0 manifold
« Reply #6 on: Jan 1st, 2009, 8:53pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Obviously inlet designs are complex and making a comparison is difficult but I think the cross sectional area of the narrowest part of the throttle body (around the butterfly for the 2.3) would be a better place to make a comparison of the 2 systems.
In the case of the 2.3 it’s the area of a 52mm bore less the butterfly spindle at 8X52mm.
|
|
IP Logged |
ABS multiplug wheel sensor pins MK IV or MK 20
|
|
|
sierra20
Junior Member
I'm a YaBB newbie!
Posts: 83
|
|
Re: 2.0 manifold
« Reply #7 on: Jan 1st, 2009, 9:00pm » |
Quote Modify
|
thanks for the advice, im not changing the head, im only doing the manifold, with out looking i assume that the injectors are in the manifold, so do i need to change them over, or are the 2.0 injectors the same as the 2.3?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
gozz
Senior Member
Been around awhile
Posts: 3475
|
|
Re: 2.0 manifold
« Reply #8 on: Jan 1st, 2009, 9:40pm » |
Quote Modify
|
pinto.
The 2.3 superseded the 12v,ie if you wanted a V6 after the inception of the 2.3 you were stuck with a Cossie.
GOZZ.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Matt
Senior Member
Manual'd and a 4.0 in the making
Posts: 2816
|
|
Re: 2.0 manifold
« Reply #9 on: Jan 1st, 2009, 10:22pm » |
Quote Modify
|
no the injectors are sperate
|
|
IP Logged |
FDS2000 Scans - Birmingham
|
|
|
Jonnycab
Senior Member
Former owner of 2.3 Ultima Facelift saloon
Posts: 3900
|
|
Re: 2.0 manifold
« Reply #10 on: Jan 2nd, 2009, 1:19am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 1st, 2009, 9:00pm, sierra20 wrote:| thanks for the advice, im not changing the head, im only doing the manifold, with out looking i assume that the injectors are in the manifold, so do i need to change them over, or are the 2.0 injectors the same as the 2.3? |
|
The injectors are mounted in an alumnium injector rail which bolts onto the manifold. Both the 2.0 & 2.3 share the same injectors & rail. So it shouldn't be a problem
Beware that the fuel rail pressure regulator is different on the two engine sizes. Even though they look the same....they've got slightly different part numbers stamped on them
Hope this helps
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
sierra20
Junior Member
I'm a YaBB newbie!
Posts: 83
|
|
Re: 2.0 manifold
« Reply #11 on: Jan 2nd, 2009, 8:52am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 2nd, 2009, 1:19am, Jonnycab wrote:
The injectors are mounted in an alumnium injector rail which bolts onto the manifold. Both the 2.0 & 2.3 share the same injectors & rail. So it shouldn't be a problem
Beware that the fuel rail pressure regulator is different on the two engine sizes. Even though they look the same....they've got slightly different part numbers stamped on them
Hope this helps |
|
Thanks for that,
is the fuel pressure reg part of the manifold, so will it need changing over?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Matt
Senior Member
Manual'd and a 4.0 in the making
Posts: 2816
|
|
Re: 2.0 manifold
« Reply #12 on: Jan 2nd, 2009, 11:19am » |
Quote Modify
|
No mate its on the end of the fuel rail, so as long as you keep the same fuel rail it wont be a proplem
|
|
IP Logged |
FDS2000 Scans - Birmingham
|
|
|
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Login
Reply
Send Topic
Print