Duratec 2.5 Swapping - Technical Advice

I've been doing a bit of reading and whatnot on the Duratec 2.5 engine, AKA the Mazda L-series.  Seems like a cheap, fairly reliable swap answer.  I see some documentation about swapping them into NC Miatas, which is cool and all.  But what I'm thinking of is a swap into older, RWD cars, like for example a Volvo 122.  

I understand the getting the engine part of the deal- 2011+ Fusions/ Escapes seem pretty much the easy button.  But does the car it's coming from need to be a manual transmission model (assuming the final configuration is going to be a manual transmission)?  

My main worry is all the electronics, computer, etc.  Does this engine need the Fusion dash, switch, key, etc to work properly?  How about the rest of the chassis wiring?  Fuel pump?

Megasquirt may be an option, but the 2.5 has a VVT that needs to be controlled, yes?  

Basically, trying to get my mind around developing a more-or-less plug and play Duratec 2.5 + M/T (maybe from an NC Miata, but would a Ranger gearbox work too, from a 2.3 Duratec Ranger?) drivetrain pack that could be swapped into a range of 60s/ 70's little RWD solid axle cars.  Preferably with a bare minimum of wiring, fuss, and electronics.  I.E. keep the stock dash, etc.  

Anyone got any first-hand experience with this?  

You'll need the pats transponder to read the keys, but not the actual cluster. You'll want the fuel pump and driver module, as it's a return less, pulse width modulated system.  Not sure how an auto pcm would work if it didn't see trans signals, so I'd recommend finding a manual trans harness/pcm. This is one of the last setups before everything went to network/bus wiring. You'll need the complete engine harness, pcm, keys, pats transponder, pump, and driver module.  Should be pretty do-able with just a few added fuses/relays. I can help with wiring diagrams if needed.

This is probably a bit outdated now but...

https://drive.google.com/open?id=10tgF9uWwoxX5f6yYgzyY1xtDdzuzepPY

And after looking at it again, it predates the 2.5 liter. Still has good info... maybe something to be learned about manual vs automatic engines.

MegaSquirt is probably the easy button. Unless you already have a complete Ford/Mazda system and the tech to reprogram it.

MS2 will do on-off VVT, MS3 will do PWM VVT.

FORscan software might come in handy for this: https://forscan.org/home.html . it lets you program a lot of modules that you can't do with regular OBD2 stuff. I know you can program new instrument clusters and such. I used it to add keys when I had a Ford Taurus X. It was amazing the amount of detail it offered. It's totally free when running on a PC but the mobile/tablet versions have a free "lite" and paid for full featured version.

Does the Duratec 2.5 use on/off VVT or is it PWM?

Quick google search looks like there's ways to end-run around the PATS.  But might be quicker to keep it.  

So if you disconnect the cluster, the ECU just won't care?  

I'm wondering how difficult it would be to buy a complete M/T Fusion from copart or whatever, and extract everything needed.  And how complex that's going to be trying to mount it all into a small 60's/ 70's econobox/ sports car.  

Wondering if anyone out there has already done a MS for a 2.5 Duratec, so you wouldn't need to recreate the wheel

google "Duratec site:msextra.com"

Just going to leave this here...

In reply to Jordan Rimpela :

I saw that article.  That's just 2.5 swapping a car with an existing ECU.  

volvoclearinghouse said:

Does the Duratec 2.5 use on/off VVT or is it PWM?

 

It's PWM but it doesn't have to be. 0V is mechanically locked at full retard. MS flipping it "on" at some rpm is the same as 100% duty cycle, 12V to the control valve and it will go full advance for more overlap. It's just replacing the closed loop control with open loop. 

Myself and this car are interested in this thread.

In reply to NOHOME :

I had you and that car in mind when I asked.

Ranger 2.3 Duratec has no VVT, and is lighter due to no balance shafts. The trans would work with any Duratec 4 cylinder as well as the 2.0 and 2.3 ecoboost engines. I don't think the Duratec powered Rangers had PATS, so there would be no need for any software tuning unless you were chasing power gains. You could take the Ranger engine, trans, wiring and PCM and put it into about any RWD chassis it could physically fit in with minimal issues. It doesn't know or care what chassis its in.

If you wanted to tune the software for boost or something down the road, a handheld SCT tuner is the easy button for that era of Fords and is widely supported.

In reply to STM317 :

AND if you get the Ranger 2.3l, you can swap the truck cams for virtually any car cam- and you will get more power- the car cams have more lift and duration compared to the ranger's cams.  

Or spend money on some really nice Duratec cams....

In reply to STM317 :

In reply to alfadriver :

I was thinking about the 2.3 too, for all the reasons you both mentioned.  I thought that all Fords after the late 90's or so had PATS, but perhaps not the trucks.  

Never done a cam swap on an OHC engine.  I imagine it's simpler than an OHV cam swap, though.  

The internets tell me the 2004+ Rangers are the ones to rob; the 2.3 received some power and durability improvements that year; from what I've read those ones are good for ~140 HP, which is still pretty good.  The 2.5 is a 170HP mill, but I don't know that 30 HP is worth all the potential intendant headaches.  Plus the 2.5 is a stroker 2.3, and I believe it's physically taller than the 2.3 (anyone confirm?)

Take measurements.  Duratecs, like most modern four cylinder engines, are TALL.

Apparently I've been tossing this idea around for awhile.

https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/grm/duratec-23-engine-ideas-questions/60790/page1/

Knurled. said:

Take measurements.  Duratecs, like most modern four cylinder engines, are TALL.

I found this on an MG site.  Looks like they notched the cross member to clear the oil pan.  Alternatively one could move the engine back, with some firewall massaging.  This might work out OK since the ranger trans (M5OD-R1) has the shifter fairly far forward.  

I think a Ranger 2.3 Duratec is also the better option, because the intake manifold faces the correct direction and you wouldn't have to source a manifold adapter to put a 2.3 manifold on a 2.5.

volvoclearinghouse said:

In reply to STM317 :

In reply to alfadriver :

I was thinking about the 2.3 too, for all the reasons you both mentioned.  I thought that all Fords after the late 90's or so had PATS, but perhaps not the trucks.  

Never done a cam swap on an OHC engine.  I imagine it's simpler than an OHV cam swap, though.  

The internets tell me the 2004+ Rangers are the ones to rob; the 2.3 received some power and durability improvements that year; from what I've read those ones are good for ~140 HP, which is still pretty good.  The 2.5 is a 170HP mill, but I don't know that 30 HP is worth all the potential intendant headaches.  Plus the 2.5 is a stroker 2.3, and I believe it's physically taller than the 2.3 (anyone confirm?)

V6 Rangers had PATS, but I'm 95% sure that the Duratec trucks did not, at least initially. You're right about 04+ getting a bit simpler, but there are some drawbacks that tag along with that year. Beginning in 04, the Rangers got smaller MAF housings that were molded into the lid of the air box instead of being separate. This makes changing the air box or using any kind of aftermarket intake or filter difficult which might be an issue in another chassis. Also, all Rangers got digital gauge clusters beginning in 04 that can bring some swap headaches.

If you're seriously considering a Ranger donor, I'd lean towards an 01-03 for the simplest swap. Then I'd swap to an NC Miata intake manifold to eliminate the IMRC and reduce overall height.

JesseWolfe said:

I think a Ranger 2.3 Duratec is also the better option, because the intake manifold faces the correct direction and you wouldn't have to source a manifold adapter to put a 2.3 manifold on a 2.5.

You're not using the Ranger intake.  It sits over the engine.  Miata intake faces forward.

Isn't the 2.0 miata intake a bit puny, though? Maybe it's not so bad for a ranger 2.3, but the newer 2.5 has a higher flowing head I'd hate to bottleneck any more. 

Hi, VCH, I have a 2.5 swapped '01 B2300, aka Betsy. More later when I'm not at work, but Megasquirt + forced induction is next step. You're definitely close enough we could meet up sometime, too, I'm Northeast DC home or Silver Spring for work.

One thing to note: '01 at least and up rangers have PATS, which means all duratec ones do.

In reply to bluej :

Your only real options, though, are Miata intake, or ITB and airbox, which has its own packaging issues.

All the theorizing about what intake manifold is best will mean nothing if it won't fit the car...

Knurled. said:

In reply to bluej :

Your only real options, though, are Miata intake, or ITB and airbox, which has its own packaging issues.

 

All the theorizing about what intake manifold is best will mean nothing if it won't fit the car...