Duratec / Mazda L-Series MZR I4 2.0 / 2.3 / 2.5 Swap

[DPDISXR4Ti]

Some more input from the Mazda world. Again, keep in mind, the Mazda MZR is largely the same engine as the Ford Duratec. That's especially true of the 2.5 iteration, where the long-blocks are identical.

I would NOT waste time with the 2.0 head. the real secret of the 2.5 is the higher flow that the head provides.

Let me put it to you this way; the stock 2.5 OUTFLOWS ANY ported 2.0/2.3 head on the market. This includes some of the 5-7K$ heads we have on the shelf from our race engines!

This quote comes from a monster 24-page thread on the Miata forum regarding swapping in a 2.5. There too, they've figured out that the 2.5 from a junked Fusion is WAY cheaper than getting one from a Mazda 3 or 6. I haven't read through it all, but I can already see there's a TON of valuable stuff in this thread regardless of how you might be thinking about doing a Duratec/MZR swap.

https://forum.miata.net/vb/showthread.php?t=522719

[DPDISXR4Ti]

Some of you have followed Jose's project on Facebook, where he is putting an EcoBoost 2.0 from an Edge into a XR. He has uploaded a BUNCH of photos into a Google drive here...
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/ ... 0kW07DOLLF

A couple things of note...
1) The Falcon 4.0 mounts mentioned earlier in this thread are NOT a plug-n-play option as originally communicated. Given that, I wouldn't recommend them, especially since availability won't be easy here in the States.

2) If you're using a T-5 and the Esslinger SBF adapter, you CAN use a regular SBF mini starter (rather than the expensive Esslinger starter), but some grinding will be required. Pics are in the link above.

3) A Hydroboost conversion will be required if you want to use the factory intake manifold. Perhaps this can be avoided if an after-market intake manifold is used such as this...
https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/ ... html?gQT=2

[DPDISXR4Ti]

Something new I learned today... The 2020-24 Explorer was available with the 2.3 EcoBoost. The intake manifold is unique to that application and very different from the one used on the Mustang 2.3 EcoBoost. It's similar in overall design to the old Sierra Cosworth 2.0 intake manifold. As such, it clears the brake booster as-is.

Already cheap as chips on eBay. I could have one at my doorstep tomorrow for $65 shipped.

Keep in mind, the intake bolt pattern for all Duratec 2.0/2.3/2.5 is the same <Edit - But NOT the EcoBoost - see post below>, but the inlets are a little different for the 2.5. I've seen indications that a factory 2.3 intake can be used on a 2.5 head with a little work, but don't take that to the bank.

[my8950]

Something new I learned today... The 2020-24 Explorer was available with the 2.3 EcoBoost. The intake manifold is unique to that application and very different from the one used on the Mustang 2.3 EcoBoost. It's similar in overall design to the old Sierra Cosworth 2.0 intake manifold. As such, it clears the brake booster as-is.

Already cheap as chips on eBay. I could have one at my doorstep tomorrow for $65 shipped.

Keep in mind, the intake bolt pattern for all Duratec 2.0/2.3/2.5 is the same, but the inlets are a little different for the 2.5. I've seen indications that a factory 2.3 intake can be used on a 2.5 head with a little work, but don't take that to the bank.

got link of ebay Explorer manifold?
Or confirm this is what you are referring to...
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=ex ... &_osacat=0

[DPDISXR4Ti]

got link of ebay Explorer manifold?
Or confirm this is what you are referring to...
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=ex ... &_osacat=0

Yep, that's it. For future searchers, just search ebay for "2020 Ford Explorer 2.3 Intake Manifold"

[DPDISXR4Ti]

I need to correct myself a bit. I just learned that the intake manifold of the EcoBoost versions of the Duratec have a different bolt pattern than the N/A engines. This means that you can NOT just slap an EcoBoost 2.3 intake manifold on a N/A Duratec head, be it 2.0, 2.3, or 2.5.

I'm assuming that the 2.0 and 2.3 EcoBoost engines ARE the same in this regard, but I've not verified that.

Carry on....

[DPDISXR4Ti]

But wait, there's more! Starting in 2013, in Brazil, Mexico, and other places across the world, the Ranger lived on as a RWD small truck, now powered by (among other things), the Duratec 2.5. It's typically called the Duratec 25 there.

Massive Speed imports the factory intake manifold for this engine. Don't get too excited though. Price is $375 and since the TB is located up high directly over the engine, I doubt it fits under our hoods.

https://massivespeedsystem.com/products ... Y4LvuhjLrw

This manifold takes advantage of the larger 2.5 inlet port, and offers a larger plenum and somewhat shorter runner for higher rpm power! Excellent for your RWD swap/ conversion/sand rail/etc!!! Does NOT have problematic tumble flaps found one some 2.3 Ranger manifolds. Designed for a drive by wire throttle body,

[DPDISXR4Ti]

But wait, there's more! In Brazil and other places across the world, the Ranger lives on as a RWD small truck, now powered by (among other things), the Duratec 2.5.

Stumbled across this project thread where someone swapped a 2.5 from a Fusion into a 2001 Ranger which originally had the 2.3 Duratec.
https://massivespeedforums.com/project- ... 30231.html
Here's some of the interesting bits he used....
1. RoW Ranger 2.5 intake manifold I referenced above
2. Factory Honda S2000 Header
3. 2006 - 09 Ford Fusion 2.3 Front pulley (same application that you want to grab the front cover from)
4. Stock un-tuned 2001 Ranger Duratec 2.3 PCM
5. Physically deleted EGR, Cat, VCT, but no tune

[DPDISXR4Ti]

Several posts back I posted up the China-cheap intake manifold designed for RWD applications that will work with the 2.0, 2.3, or 2.5. From what I read today, that manifold doesn't work so great on a street car, as it's optimized for maximum high-RPM flow. Here's a couple pricey alternatives that seem to be more "street" oriented.

Fab9 $995
https://fab9tuning.com/fab9-elite-nc-mx ... ct-reviews


CNC Innovations $897
https://www.cncinnovationsmy.com/produc ... x9btvIFmkE

[DPDISXR4Ti]

For someone wanting to do a super low-budget N/A Duratec swap, here's an option I stumbled across...

You can run the 2005-2006 Ford Ranger 2.3 ECU stock (no anti-theft for those 2 years only), I did this in my buggy with a $200 Focus 2.0L longblock. It ran great, but I was using Ranger parts attached to it (chopped up harness, throttle body, intake and exhaust manifolds, 4-post coil pack and wires, etc.).

[DPDISXR4Ti]

Some data-points culled from the RWD Duratec group regarding TB's...

Brian Axup
the popular single blade throttlebodies for Duratec swaps are:
Drive-by-wire:
OEM Ford 2.5L Duratec
OEM Mazda MX5
Bosch 68mm

Cable operated:
Esslinger Billet 62mm
OEM Ford 2.3L Focus
Aftermarket Mustang 4.6/5.0L 70mm
The Mustang throttlebody and Focus throttlebodies require adapters to fit in place of the DBW throttles. The Esslinger Billet 62mm is a bolt on replacement to convert to cable throttle with a slightly larger throttle blade than any of the OEM DBW throttlebodies have.

Matt Gunnolf
DBW all the way. The Bosch 68mm is a good one that bolts right on. But it's big enough that can be tough to manage at small opening angles.
The OEM Mustang 2.3Ecoboost throttle also bolts right on, it's 62mm. That's a good size for most applications. I recommend that one. The 68mm is actually too big for most builds.

[my8950]

Some data-points culled from the RWD Duratec group regarding TB's...

Brian Axup
the popular single blade throttlebodies for Duratec swaps are:
Drive-by-wire:
OEM Ford 2.5L Duratec
OEM Mazda MX5
Bosch 68mm

Cable operated:
Esslinger Billet 62mm
OEM Ford 2.3L Focus
Aftermarket Mustang 4.6/5.0L 70mm
The Mustang throttlebody and Focus throttlebodies require adapters to fit in place of the DBW throttles. The Esslinger Billet 62mm is a bolt on replacement to convert to cable throttle with a slightly larger throttle blade than any of the OEM DBW throttlebodies have.

Matt Gunnolf
DBW all the way. The Bosch 68mm is a good one that bolts right on. But it's big enough that can be tough to manage at small opening angles.
The OEM Mustang 2.3Ecoboost throttle also bolts right on, it's 62mm. That's a good size for most applications. I recommend that one. The 68mm is actually too big for most builds.

Wouldn't a certain ECU be required for using DBW or Cable throttle? My thinking is, that would add a level of complexity to the picture...

[DPDISXR4Ti]

Wouldn't a certain ECU be required for using DBW or Cable throttle? My thinking is, that would add a level of complexity to the picture...

For sure your chosen PCM/ECU would need to support the TB of choice. I think nowadays many after-market PCM's support both, but obviously you'll want to know all that before spending money. If you were going to use a factory PCM, it would support just one.

[whitelx]

I don't see anyone mentioning the MT82 from the ecoboost Mustang. Any reason not to use this vs an NC Miata 5spd? Remote shifter seems kind of nice. Is there much of a size or weight difference? I initially wanted to use a T5, but the cost of adapters or bellhousings seems prohibitive compared to native transmissions.

What is needed to run a 2.5 from a Fusion on Microsquirt? No real need for the variable valve timing and I'm ok with batch fire injection and waste spark.

[DPDISXR4Ti]

I don't see anyone mentioning the MT82 from the ecoboost Mustang. Any reason not to use this vs an NC Miata 5spd? Remote shifter seems kind of nice. Is there much of a size or weight difference? I initially wanted to use a T5, but the cost of adapters or bellhousings seems prohibitive compared to native transmissions.

What is needed to run a 2.5 from a Fusion on Microsquirt? No real need for the variable valve timing and I'm ok with batch fire injection and waste spark.

I think the 5 and 6-speeds from the NC Miata are more robust than the MT82, but any should work. I don't know of anyone who has put MT82 in a Merkur.

I don't know the details on running Microsquirt. FWIW, I had hoped to be able to run some sort of factory PCM (Ford or Mazda), and one of the reasons for doing so is the built-in VVT support. I keep running into road-blocks with that idea. Yes, you can turn off error codes, but apparently not error (limp) routines.