2.0L Stock Bottom End Build

whynotthinkwhynot · Mar 21, 2011

Nah, just reprogram. The blocks are different- like 302 vs 351, the D23 is taller by 11mm, and has a balance shaft.

Buickboy · Mar 21, 2011

ehancock said:
With the cams I have a fairly lopey idle as it is, with lights dimming often. I haven't noticed any MORE dimming, but I need to raise my idle anyways. My car obviously runs warmer though, the fans kick on more often but iirc they're set at 180. I need a 180 thermo.

Ok, thats good to know! Im assuming you went with the CFM ones?

whynotthinkwhynot said:
The problem with this is that you don't have a separate lobe on your cams that locks in at higher rpms to give you more breath. With a mechanical valvetrain you're going to sacrifice the low end to get the high end. It's that old velocity vs volume issue. You need velocity to make the most of the low end, but you must have volume to breath in the higher rpms. You can do it, don't get me wrong, just don't expect it to be like the engines you're comparing it to- at least the Hondas. Neons- ok yeah, let's see how long those engines last spinning that fast. The Dtec has a better valvetrain. You might want to install a vacuum pump as well, but I'd wait and see. This is all assuming you're shooting for St3 cams, high flow intake, ported head, larger valves, and all the goodies you'd need to run to 8k with power.

More power to ya bro, but don't be surprised if you have less than or equal to the torque of a stock engine when you should have an increase due to higher compression.

i understand the k series has vtec and thats what makes it idle nicely as well as scream up top. they also have 11:1 compression stock so thats another advantage they have over us. I dont mind a raised, rough idle or a slight reduction in low end torque. My car has a peak around 4k where it shoots up, levels off then plummets. i want to shoot for a better average over all rpms rather than a peak.

I want to look into Rhodes Lifters when the time comes for the built 2.3 with bigger cam. should help a lot with low rpm torque as well as idle and vac issues. that is, if its possible in our engines lol.

With a ported head, cossie IM and cams on a 2.0 I can see volume will be no problem but lower speed velocity will suffer.
I wont be surprised, I have a pretty good idea of what I want and what these mods mean [thumb]

whynotthinkwhynot said:
Nah, just reprogram. The blocks are different- like 302 vs 351, the D23 is taller by 11mm, and has a balance shaft.

its good that its so straightforward. wouldnt there be a little issue with the 2.3's dual stage intake mani but that would be solved by a window switch or just ditching it for the cossie or even the 2.0's (and have hp suffer)

ehancock · Mar 21, 2011

No I bought an FC one from gold coast and made the changes that CFM made to theirs before instling it. The CFM ones are the same as FC.

Buickboy · Mar 21, 2011

ehancock said:
No I bought an FC one from gold coast and made the changes that CFM made to theirs before instling it. The CFM ones are the same as FC.

Ok, was wondering if it was different than mine, mostly the water pump pulley size. couldnt remember if cfm's was just lighter or slowed the pump down a little

Buickboy · Mar 21, 2011

updated to include stage 2 crowers as the cams. I cant find Cranes anywhere and the crowers have less gross lift but more duration. they also have 2deg more LSA (112 vs 110 for the cranes). The tradeoffs in LSA are here: http://www.compcams.com/Technical/FAQ/LSAproperties.asp

so broader power curve, easier idle, higher torque peak and more piston to valve clearance (just going off LSA, I know the longer duration will change things even more)

Im not sure if they list the 2.0 or 2.3 in the cam catalogs but crower has a RPM range of 1000-7800, sounds like thats where I want to be!

Bwinkelsas · Mar 22, 2011

Buickboy said:
great minds think alike [thumb]

are you keeping the stock pistons seeing as youre pulling it apart? keeping the nitrous? your times were a bit of motivation for me when I was setting up mine lol. trying to sell the kit now because I dont really drag race or do highway pulls, plus the closest 1/4 mile track is over 2 hours away.

mines going to be a long process too... id like to get the cams with tax money when it comes. Id like to at least do cossie IM and cams this year then work on a head package. Ive also got a clutchmasters stage 3 with lightweight flywheel waiting. want to do a torsen and maybe 4.06 gears at the same time and im sure the 2.0 will love it.

im glad that someone else is thinking of the same thing, hopefully others are too!

i was planning on keeping stock pistons, and i am keeping the nitrous, i just had a interview this morning for a second full time job so we'll see if that goes anywhere which would really help.

i wanted to do the torsen / 4.06's at the same time as the clutch but could wait any longer.i just put a short set of tires on my car to give me the final drive i wanted as a short term fix (22.4"), i need to do the math to see what it equals out too but dont have much free time.

i am not too sure yet what set of cams i want to start off with, i was also thinking the crower stage 2's, ill have to put more time into looking and thinking lol.

and i was told on monday my cossi should be in wednesday which is tomorrow, sure hope i get that phone call.

whynotthinkwhynot · Mar 22, 2011

Buickboy said:
I want to look into Rhodes Lifters when the time comes for the built 2.3 with bigger cam. should help a lot with low rpm torque as well as idle and vac issues. that is, if its possible in our engines lol.

Not possible. There's no lifter, the buckets aren't oiled in the same manner to allow for hydraulics- without hydraulic you can't have anti-pump up lifters.

OK just making sure that you knew what you were in for. I've thought about a lot of things, but I think making tons of power under 7k with a turbo is more like what I'd prefer. I'd be long gone by the time they wound anything out.

Buickboy · Mar 23, 2011

whynotthinkwhynot said:
Not possible. There's no lifter, the buckets aren't oiled in the same manner to allow for hydraulics- without hydraulic you can't have anti-pump up lifters.

OK just making sure that you knew what you were in for. I've thought about a lot of things, but I think making tons of power under 7k with a turbo is more like what I'd prefer. I'd be long gone by the time they wound anything out.

ah, wishful thinking on my part then lol. scratch the lifters.

all motor isnt for every one, will i get bored with it eventually? maybe. more power and a lot more torque could be had with a turbo but I think this will be more fun for me. on a street car I can see having a lot more traction with an all motor setup versus a turbo and I like the way it builds power the higher you rev it. different strokes

whynotthinkwhynot · Mar 23, 2011

I'm not trying to take wind out of your sails here Buickboy, but reading my posts it might seem like that. I did the research myself because eventually the wagon will need something. In one hand, you have high rev NA power, and bigger engine NA power. The bigger engine made more sense to me there because A) I hate big oversized high rpm tachs, and don't want mine bouncing off a needle. B) torque= power, hp= torque applied to rpm. We all know how that goes.

One drawback is peakiness. I like the broad band of the D20. The D23 is broad as well, but anything you do NA- whether stroking or opening it up- you de-broaden the outcome. [dunno] That is as it is.

C) Turbo: I like the idea of having tons of power at low rpm vs your typical import wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee- there's the power there's the power. Like, dude I had that push 3k rpm ago. There's a big difference between 200 hp at 8k rpm and 200 hp at 4k rpm. Our engines seem more slanted to the American way: power before it goes wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

I'm still up in the air between turbo and NA, but at least a year out from anything anyway.

Now there is a way that I considered for an NA lots'o'power at less rpm, and that way is outrageous compression. We're already running at 10:1 with 87 octane fuel= yay ECU and Al blocks. Why hasn't anyone gotten ridiculous with compression ratios? It would seem feasible that you could run 12-13 comp ratios on pump high octane with water/meth injection. There are now water/meth injectors out there with computer controls. Yes, that is insane, and IMO you woudn't want to run spark up to the point where -10 wouldn't run on 91 or 93 without W/M cooling. On the same note- boost could be considered insane because one failed/clogged injector might ruin months of savings if you don't have the knock sensor set to yank spark like a chihuahua on a rope tied to a motorcyle. You might end up having to carry an emergency gallon of -20F washer fluid in the trunk, piping in a very large holding tank, and even wiring up an ignition cut-off circuit through a tank level and output pressure switch. That's what we're here for right? To push the envelope?

Granted the higher end of SnowPerf's line is as much as a turbo, so there's a drawback. However if NA power is what you want- stroke that ho and squeeze as much as you can out of every drop of fuel. Screw rpm I say, have 250 whp at 6k without boost.

Buickboy · Mar 23, 2011

whynotthinkwhynot said:
I'm not trying to take wind out of your sails here Buickboy, but reading my posts it might seem like that. I did the research myself because eventually the wagon will need something. In one hand, you have high rev NA power, and bigger engine NA power. The bigger engine made more sense to me there because A) I hate big oversized high rpm tachs, and don't want mine bouncing off a needle. B) torque= power, hp= torque applied to rpm. We all know how that goes.

One drawback is peakiness. I like the broad band of the D20. The D23 is broad as well, but anything you do NA- whether stroking or opening it up- you de-broaden the outcome. [dunno] That is as it is.

C) Turbo: I like the idea of having tons of power at low rpm vs your typical import wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee- there's the power there's the power. Like, dude I had that push 3k rpm ago. There's a big difference between 200 hp at 8k rpm and 200 hp at 4k rpm. Our engines seem more slanted to the American way: power before it goes wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

I'm still up in the air between turbo and NA, but at least a year out from anything anyway.

Now there is a way that I considered for an NA lots'o'power at less rpm, and that way is outrageous compression. We're already running at 10:1 with 87 octane fuel= yay ECU and Al blocks. Why hasn't anyone gotten ridiculous with compression ratios? It would seem feasible that you could run 12-13 comp ratios on pump high octane with water/meth injection. There are now water/meth injectors out there with computer controls. Yes, that is insane, and IMO you woudn't want to run spark up to the point where -10 wouldn't run on 91 or 93 without W/M cooling. On the same note- boost could be considered insane because one failed/clogged injector might ruin months of savings if you don't have the knock sensor set to yank spark like a chihuahua on a rope tied to a motorcyle. You might end up having to carry an emergency gallon of -20F washer fluid in the trunk, piping in a very large holding tank, and even wiring up an ignition cut-off circuit through a tank level and output pressure switch. That's what we're here for right? To push the envelope?

Granted the higher end of SnowPerf's line is as much as a turbo, so there's a drawback. However if NA power is what you want- stroke that ho and squeeze as much as you can out of every drop of fuel. Screw rpm I say, have 250 whp at 6k without boost.

different strokes for different folks lol. and no worries, Ive had plenty of time to think this over just like you have. Ive had big torque before, I want the high rpm power experience now. Ive read about some water/meth systems, looks like a lot of work for that last bit of power. In theory its pretty cool but if im going to have to fill a tank itll be with nitrous [wiggle]

I have a add-on tach already as my car didnt come with one and the replacement cluster I picked up has ~120k on it. When the time comes i may be sick of this tach and swap it for the more sedate stock cluster but for right now the 8k autogage on the column works well. its not a 5" monster tach, those are way too ricey. it has a built in shift light which is great and right now im trying to find a bulb that will match the stock green glow.
12.5:1 compression has been done on a modern 4cyl on pump gas. I have 93 at every station where I live and with a good dyno tune itll be ok.

so in my first post thats the gameplan for right now. Final goal would be a 12.5:1, built 2.3 block thats sleeved and bored to displace 2.5L. this would be better IMO than a factory 2.5 which has a massive stroke and probably wont want live long at higher revs. but thats not what this thread is about and has a bad chance of actually happening unlike (at the very least) cams, cossie IM and UDP this year.

thanks for your input!

whynotthinkwhynot · Mar 24, 2011

Turbo Tom sells a 2.4 that's a bored D23 with a cast Ranger crank, but he offers billet cranks of any stroke. The prices are reasonable so it's not that OMG I could've gotten heads for an LS block cost of the Cosworth.

I wrote down 12-13, but my brain was saying 13.5 over and over again. That's what the 12.5 pistons for a D23 end up being in a D20.

Yeah, I'm not of the Big Ugly Import Car Killer lineage, but I recognize who made the best 455. In fact I have a friend who recently showed me his new purchase of a 73 Firebird that was abandoned due to a carb fire. The distributor is in the front on that 455, and he is extremely excited. Anyway, I believe rod ratios do make a difference in how broad the torque curve is, however, you just can't get into the excellent ratio with the higher displacements in these engines. It would be nice if Ford's 2.5 block would fit in a Focus because it's likely taller, but from what I've been told, it won't fit. It's likely longer as well due to a slightly larger bore and that's the problem. It wouldn't have to be much longer for it to run into the strut towers. If it would fit, then you could gain a little bit of ratio back at the expense of some torque, but have a less peaky curve.

Now if I was going turbo, I'd stick with the D20. Have some fun with numbers- divide the D20 torque by it's engine size, then do the same for the D23. There's a big difference. I'm sure there's more to it than just the old rod ratio- the first thing you'd have to do is remove the exhaust on both of them for something more free flowing. Still, I think the case can be made, and that's all I needed for a choice for a turbo motor. I don't need over 300hp anyway.

We'll see what decision I come to in a few years. Maybe we can compare power between 12.5 and 13.5.

Buickboy · Mar 24, 2011

whynotthinkwhynot said:
Turbo Tom sells a 2.4 that's a bored D23 with a cast Ranger crank, but he offers billet cranks of any stroke. The prices are reasonable so it's not that OMG I could've gotten heads for an LS block cost of the Cosworth.

I wrote down 12-13, but my brain was saying 13.5 over and over again. That's what the 12.5 pistons for a D23 end up being in a D20.

Yeah, I'm not of the Big Ugly Import Car Killer lineage, but I recognize who made the best 455. In fact I have a friend who recently showed me his new purchase of a 73 Firebird that was abandoned due to a carb fire. The distributor is in the front on that 455, and he is extremely excited. Anyway, I believe rod ratios do make a difference in how broad the torque curve is, however, you just can't get into the excellent ratio with the higher displacements in these engines. It would be nice if Ford's 2.5 block would fit in a Focus because it's likely taller, but from what I've been told, it won't fit. It's likely longer as well due to a slightly larger bore and that's the problem. It wouldn't have to be much longer for it to run into the strut towers. If it would fit, then you could gain a little bit of ratio back at the expense of some torque, but have a less peaky curve.

Now if I was going turbo, I'd stick with the D20. Have some fun with numbers- divide the D20 torque by it's engine size, then do the same for the D23. There's a big difference. I'm sure there's more to it than just the old rod ratio- the first thing you'd have to do is remove the exhaust on both of them for something more free flowing. Still, I think the case can be made, and that's all I needed for a choice for a turbo motor. I don't need over 300hp anyway.

We'll see what decision I come to in a few years. Maybe we can compare power between 12.5 and 13.5.

Ive read about Tom's stroker, well see when the time comes. I had the engine for my buick built at a local shop and I feel like I want to get my hands really dirty this time. if I go crazy ill have a shop do all the machine work but assemble it myself. if I bitch out itll be a built shortblock from somewhere.

MMM Gm 455's. delightful engines! those firebirds were one of the last true performance cars going into the mid 70's and my uncle had a few and has more than a few stories lol. Im glad to hear theres buick power under the hood of that one, tell him to get on v8buick.com!

I agree with not needing over 300hp- ive ridden in big hp fwd cars- my friends rsx hit 480whp and never, ever had traction. awesome car and scary fast in 4th gear though

Id like to see a duratec with compression through the roof like youre talking about. either way it sounds like itll be a ton of fun!

im going to get re-dynoed soon. my friend knows the owner of the local dyno and says he can get me on for super cheap. so cheap that the next step here is to dyno, install my UDP and then go back. should be interesting and put a lot of arguements to rest. [cheers] I dont care if it shows nothing on the dyno- itll be proof thats been lacking around here. if I make a few whp- awesome.

Bwinkelsas · Mar 30, 2011

im not on here often, but april 10th is a dyno day hosted by my friends shop, $40 for 4 pulls, i hope to have a tune and my cossi manifold on before then (it finally came in last week). aslong as it all goes as im planing ill have a pic or pics and possibly a dyno video that sunday night. im gonna focus on motor pulls but if they will give me 5 minutes ill swap plugs and do a nitrous pull or two.

Buickboy · Mar 30, 2011

Bwinkelsas said:
im not on here often, but april 10th is a dyno day hosted by my friends shop, $40 for 4 pulls, i hope to have a tune and my cossi manifold on before then (it finally came in last week). aslong as it all goes as im planing ill have a pic or pics and possibly a dyno video that sunday night. im gonna focus on motor pulls but if they will give me 5 minutes ill swap plugs and do a nitrous pull or two.

jw did you have the cossie modified or did you swap to the early PS pump?

really excited to see your results! [headbang] I think my baseline dyno will be around the same time

Bwinkelsas · Mar 30, 2011

Buickboy said:
jw did you have the cossie modified or did you swap to the early PS pump?

really excited to see your results! [headbang] I think my baseline dyno will be around the same time

no powersteering lol, i did tb1999's p/s delete, but just looped the hi and low pressure lines on the rack.

i really have no idea what to expect on the dyno, dont think ive ever seen a 2.0 dyno with basicly full bolt ons? courious what kinda torque it will make, or should i say how little torque.

I wana see pics and better yet a video of your car on the dyno [wiggle] not too many decent videos lol

Buickboy · Mar 31, 2011

Bwinkelsas said:
no powersteering lol, i did tb1999's p/s delete, but just looped the hi and low pressure lines on the rack.

i really have no idea what to expect on the dyno, dont think ive ever seen a 2.0 dyno with basicly full bolt ons? courious what kinda torque it will make, or should i say how little torque.

I wana see pics and better yet a video of your car on the dyno [wiggle] not too many decent videos lol

Im not sure either, I think the stock cams are going to limit the fun because with that IM itll really want to be wound up. my guess is 150-155whp with ~125wtq peak but over 120 for a good length. neat that you've done the delete! I think im going to have mine cut and welded but you never know..

Ill have a video when I go, same to you lol. Ill be using a HD cam borrowed from my dad this time unlike this where I used a crappy camera:

(dyno from 2008)

Bwinkelsas · Apr 15, 2011

Im sorry, i did not get the xcal till after the dyno day came and went... but i did get a video of the car doing something as good as dyno-ing

http://www.focusfanatics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=255698

thanks to jim (roushturboedzx3) btw that was still without the tune and manifold.

Buickboy · Apr 19, 2011

Bwinkelsas said:
Im sorry, i did not get the xcal till after the dyno day came and went... but i did get a video of the car doing something as good as dyno-ing

http://www.focusfanatics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=255698

thanks to jim (roushturboedzx3) btw that was still without the tune and manifold.

Thats awesome! nice times for a 75 shot, makes me want to hold on to my setup... but at the same time the closest track is like 2 hrs away. bleh.

let me know when you do the mani [thumb]

im still waiting on my buddy so we can go get dynoed. baseline, UDPs, redyno. then saving for the next step.

Bwinkelsas · Apr 21, 2011

the manifold is on the car and i so far only have a "base" tune from tom, were working on it slowly lol... after 6k the car comes alive pretty hard, still has good power across the board but is deffinitly lacking the mid range atleast compared to the 6 - 7k power the car has now, hard to explain but i guess thats what the dyno is for. the car at this stage atleast is being held back by lack of rpm for sure.

Buickboy · Jul 3, 2011

Installed my Intake manifold yesterday! Talking to a local fab guy about a custom 3" exhaust (I can source vibrant muffler and resonator for 20/ea from a friend)

Install:
Before

The Transplant

Dropping fans

More room

Getting started

Brakes I think (pull up, then move the red disc up with a screwdriver)

The center bolt!

IMRC (tumble flap) motor.

pain in the ass. (move mani, unbolt what used to be here, finish removing mani)

old mani

Naked!

reinstalling

DONE!

2.0L Stock Bottom End Build

whynotthinkwhynot

Buickboy

ehancock

Buickboy

Buickboy

Bwinkelsas

whynotthinkwhynot

Buickboy

whynotthinkwhynot

Buickboy

whynotthinkwhynot

Buickboy

Bwinkelsas

Buickboy

Bwinkelsas

Buickboy

Bwinkelsas

Buickboy

Bwinkelsas

Buickboy

Top Contributors this Month

Recommended Communities