If you do decide to go either EB or mzr/duratec, LKQ has pretty good prices and availability for used long blocks on Ebay, and the locations are close enough to pick up and avoid shipping. Here's a 2.0 EB from a 14 fusion with 52k for $500, located in Martinsburg, WV. Going through ebay also means you don't have to mess with a core. Their Dumfries, VA location seems to have a large inventory. The 2.5 na motors are even cheaper (some sub $200 with double digit miles).
Well, that makes it pretty simple. Those EB's are really cheap, and Martinsburg is very close........
dherr (Forum Supporter) said:Well, that makes it pretty simple. Those EB's are really cheap, and Martinsburg is very close........
So cheap and so boosty.
I've got some pics and dimensions for you. Roughly speaking, I think the 2.0 will fit fine. There's a big IF there, depending on the width of the shock towers as they rise. Will upload after lunch.
In reply to dherr (Forum Supporter) :
Here are a couple pics:
Widest point across is from the alternator to all the turbo junk on the other side. This shows how much space my frame has:
This is measured basically at the very top of the crank pulley. With any luck it's high enough that the suspension towers are wide there.
From the side, it looks like this:
So you're an easy 4" shorter than the Triumph I-6. For reference, my factory motor mount was mounted about half-way between the two vertical tubes shown.
Thanks Scott, it all looks promising. I am heavily leaning towards the 2.0 ecoboost with a Miata transmission for size, weight, packaging and performance. Having done my Spitfire with an NB Miata motor, I know what needs to be clearanced for the Miata 6 speed to fit down low and the ecoboost will have all the performance I need.
Do you know if the 2.3 and 2.0 are basically the same dimensions? I have a dimension sheet from Ford Performance on their 2.3 crate engine, so curious if it is basically the same as the 2.0, assumption being that the 2.3 is just a stroked 2.0?
In reply to dherr (Forum Supporter) :
As far as I can tell, they are based on the same block. A lot of the "N/S Conversion Kit" parts for the 2.0 are just Mustang 2.3 parts. The fact that the manifolds are interchangeable tells a lot of the story.
That said, there are some significant external differences. The turbo is a bit bigger and higher up on the block in the 2.3 (better for swaps?). The A/C compressor is totally opposite. Alternator is the same.
You would almost certainly want to swap in a RWD oil pan, since you'd want clearance over your steering rack.
With the "hot tune" the 2.0 will push 350 lb-ft at 2500 rpm. I believe the 2.3 is 350 stock. It may rev a bit more than the 2.0, but I don't have any direct experience. The 2.0 in my Focus ST hits hard down low, but doesn't love to rev.
Biggest difference for me was used engine cost and availability. The 2.0 are crazy common around here, and I payed $800 for my low mileage unit. The 2.3's are very rare and often more like $2000. And every one of them is pulled from a hard front-end hit!
Well based on a bunch of factors, looks like Ecoboost for the win! It also looks like I'll get a 2.0 from the junkyard to use for the rough measurements (and probably for a future build), but for the car we are building, it is going to get a Ford 2.3 Ecoboost crate motor. Below is the car it is going in, rust free MK2 GT6 shell and restored chassis.
In reply to TVR Scott (Forum Supporter) :
Can you get me one more measurement? Need the length of the MX5 transmission from bellhousing to the shifter.
Service with a smile! Your magic number is 28.5".
So you're going full Ford Performance 2.3 crate motor, eh? Fancy! Exciting stuff.
Yes, long story but I'll document it in a build soon. Working on the TR4A project, almost ready for paint, then I'll spend some actual time on the GT6 project. Much appreciate the measurements.
So armed with a tape measure, drawing of the engine from Ford Performance and Scott's measurements, it looks like this might fit with some frame surgery including keeping the AC. Looks like I can place the engine forward of the towers to allow the front accessories to clear the shock towers and height and overall engine weight will be less than the GT6 motor. Engine height also seems to be good and moving the transmission forward helps as I won't need to clearance the frame as much as I had to do with my turbo Spitfire. Won't know until I get all the parts for mockup. For now, I'll use an MX5 6 speed and a used Ecoboost 2.0. Crazy how cheap they are, especially since they bolt to a MX5 transmission. Of course, you would need a 2K ECU to actually use one, but for my purposes, this will be fine and this engine and transmission will end up in another project at some point. Turbo plumbing and the shock towers will be a consideration, but hopefully this will be behind the turrets, but will see soon.
Guess this has crossed over to a build now, picking up a 2.0 Ecoboost from an escape with 43K miles on it for $400 complete with the turbo, manifolds and accessories. I'll use it to figure out what needs to be clearanced on the frame and bodywork to make it all fit. Hopefully the crate motor won't be that much different. I got a line on a NC 6 speed locally, so that will give me what I need to get started. Thanks all for the suggestions as usual!
dherr (Forum Supporter) said:Yes, long story but I'll document it in a build soon. Working on the TR4A project, almost ready for paint, then I'll spend some actual time on the GT6 project. Much appreciate the measurements.
I'll take all the TR4 Content you're willilng to post !
How will you engine manage it?
In reply to Indy "Nub" Guy :
Yes, I'll post an update once it goes to paint as I'll be assembling the chassis. This project went from "getting it back on the road", to "bitchen rides" cool.
In reply to nocones :
For the GT6, we are going to use a Ford Performance 2.3 crate motor and the Ford Performance Control Pack, which has the harness, ECU and rest of the kit to make it work as it is set up for RWD. But that is not an inexpensive drivetrain option for most of us.
I picked up the 2.0 to figure out the packaging, but will try to find a home for it once the project is done. Ford no longer makes a kit for the 2.0, but SCS in the UK has a kit and standalone ECU and a modified Ford wiring harness. https://www.scs-delta.co.uk/ford-ecoboost-ecu Not cheap, but HP rarely is. They have seemed to address all the issues with these modern motors including the DI. So with their ECU, a low mileage junkyard engine and an NC miata transmission, you can have a compact, 250HP+ RWD drivetrain for around $2,800. From their web site below.
"This complete engine management system for the Ford 2.0 EcoBoost engine controls all the standard engine parameters including the dual variable valve timing system, drive by wire throttle, high pressure fuel pump and high voltage DI injectors. The package comprises an SC GDI 4 ECU and modified Ford engine wiring loom (as an exchange). The GDI 4 ECU is pre-mapped for the standard engine, modified engines will require remapping to optimize the power gain from those modifications.
With this ECU and loom combination the very powerful and modern 2.0 EcoBoost engine can easily be used in many different applications from kit cars, track cars"
We have the 2.0 in our MKC, and I use it to flat tow my rallyx e30 to events. That thing will scoot, and tows well. A 2.3 in a gt6 will be a riot!
Have you looked at the EcoBoost Datsun thread that damarble has going? He ordered a 2.3 crate motor kit from Mars Engines. They do all the ECU wizardry and supply you a running, ready to go, crate engine.
Not cheap, but you're looking to spend bucks here anyway.
I'll say the info and tech support from Ford Performance is a bit spotty. That route might be an easier path for a 2.3 swap.
Yes, been watching his build and just checked out Mars Engines. That is cool, not cheap but cheaper than the Ford Performance package. After getting the 2014 Escape motor (only 43K miles and super clean) and the transmission, it looks like we will go with this as the drivetrain, since there is not much risk at this price point. The SCS Delta ECU and wiring kit is about $2,500 but that is $5k less than the crate motor, so we have plenty of budget for another motor if necessary. Put the GT6 in the garage yesterday and have the engine and transmission ready to start playing. Got to love a car that me and my son can carry in pieces into the garage. We picked up the chassis, complete with suspension and placed it in the garage and then carried the body shell, doors and all and laid it on the chassis. I'll get it on jack stands in the rear before I do any work under the car, but my point is these things are really light. Since you weighed the engine and transmission assembly at 399 pounds compete, I should be taking 200 pounds out of the front of the car and adding 2-3 times the power.
Super cool. Hard to pass up the 2.0. I'm scanning your pic for missing stuff, and it looks pretty complete on that side.
I'll be very interested to see how the SDS system works out.
The engine seemed to be complete with everything, i also got the alternator separately. Crazy how inexpensive these things are. I'll pull the harness and send it to SCS Delta so they can do the mods and start a build page soon.
In reply to dherr (Forum Supporter) :
Yeah, it looks like they hardly stripped it at all. Mine had no wiring harnesses, and all the fuel and coolant lines were gone.
Looks like you need an oil filter solution. I've got the stock one that I removed if you want to do it easy. Otherwise, I could probably be convinced to machine another relocation plate.
Yes, I won't know until it sits in the chassis if a stock filter assembly will fit or if I need a relocation plate.Mounttune has one cheap https://www.mountuneusa.com/Oil-Take-Off-Plate-Ford-Duratec-2-0L-EcoBoost-p/2363-osp-aa.htm
Dave, here's some info on the 2.3 parts:
Rear coolant housing -
The upper pipe that plug into this didn't have any identifying marks.
Here's the intake manifold:
And another view with some more numbers:
Hopefully that'll get you started!
You'll need to log in to post.
