I'm not a Pinto guy........never had one, never really worked on one. But I ended up buying a coupe with one in it. I thought.....hell with gas price's going the way they were, and I knew that those little motors can be built to be pretty healthy. And what was cool was that it still sounded like the original 4 banger. Anyway.......before I get too carried away...the info that I need help with is where are the numbers located on the motor that will tell me exactally what year it is. And my other question is......'hope this isn't too stupid of a question'.... How do you tell the diffrence between a 2.0 and a 2.3 motor. Thanks for your time, knowlege, and help. D
try theese folks they have a lot of information on their web page: http://www.esslingeracing.com/ http://racerwalsh.zoovy.com/ I road raced both 2.0 and 2.3 but I do not remember how to tell them apart. I think it is the distributor placement. hope this helps Jim H
2.0 engines were only used here for about 71-74. There was, and probably is, lots of speed stuff around for them but hard to find here I imagine, Europe everywhere. 2.3 engine came here in 1974 and was used for years even in some form now maybe. Lots of hop up stuff for them too. Virtually nothing interchnges between the 2 engines. I don't even think the bellhousing patterns are the same. Don't laugh about Pintos/Bobcats/MIIs. They are tough little cars that **** with a little work and not too many bucks. But unless they are sedan deliveries (except MMII) they're ugly dogs and nothing can help that. They are economical and reliable and do their job as transportation well.
2.0 was much less common,I think the cyl head is slightly different. 2.3 is easy to find,later Rangers used the same motor opened up to 2.5 with two spark plugs per cyl.
Here's a good thread on the engines...... http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=146592&highlight=esslinger Coincedentally, I just gave away all my 2.0 stuff, performance cams, lifters, headers, etc..... There are @ 5-6 different head configurations (port sizes, combustion chamber differences, etc.....)
Find a Merkur XR4Ti or 87-88 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe and swap its engine into that Pinto. The XR4Ti and TC had turbocharged 2.3's. Straight up bolt in and an instant 175+ hp with 250 within cheap easy reach. And they will knock out 30 or more mpg!
Ok....I just talked to a guy in the Tech dept at Essilnger, and he told me that if the motor has 4 cam towers...then it's a 2.3 motor. If it has 3 cam towers, then it's a 2.0. He also said that 2.3 motors were made in 71-74.for 4 years. Everything else was 2.0
the automatic bellhousing will interchage between the 2.0 and the 2.3. You will need (two) stepped bushing if you use the 2.0 bell on a 2.3 motor. I think the 2.3 engine used a C4 automatic from 74-76. Very hard to find that bellhousing. After 76 I think they used a C3 transmission. Put two sidedraft webers on it!
He's wrong or your heard it wrong. The 2000 was made 71-74 and the 2300 was made from 74-75 very recently. We've done plenty of both as they are used in vintage hydroplane cl***es....and we've done a couple 500hp turbo 2.3's for the SVO/Turbo Coupe guys. Cool little motors that are built like a brick ****house. -Bigchief.
71 to 73 1.6 or 1600cc was base engine 71-73 2.0 or 2000cc was optional 74 2.0 was base 2.3 2300cc optional 75 up 2.3 was standard enginethere is a bellhousing pre75 bellhousing that will bolt up to all 3 engines offered in the pinto but they are rare i had one in a 72 pinto coupe"trunk model"1.6 was not overhead cam both others were i'm not up on ranger etc.check motor books international for hipo info 2 and 2.3 are mini stock engines and theres lots of hipo info around for them PM me and i'll look up some of my books
hey if you keep the ngine and want a cool intake and carb set up, I bought this from a fellow hamb'r thinking it would fit a 2.3 (2300) late model engine (89 mustang 4 banger). well it didn't fit but it turns out it's for a 2.0 (2000) pinto 4 banger. the only thing I did was gl*** bead the intake other then that rebuild the carbs and it's vintage induction! http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=199494
If you do need it I have a 2.3 to T-5 bellhousing. The trick will be to find the T-5 with the fine spline imput shaft. Let me know if you need it. Jim H
Here's my 2.0, and some different manifolds I've picked up. I also have an Offenhauser 4 barrel manifold, all for the 2.0.
It's easy to find a T5 that will fit a 2.3. Every single manual transmission 2.3L Mustang, Capri, Cougar, Thunderbird, etc in the early 80s onward had a T5, so just snag one out of a junkyard. Don't get a V8 T5 though, because the input shaft is larger.
I think the 2.0 had it's oil filter near the front, next to dizzy.....2.3 I think is farther back near the bellhousing.
I put a T-5 out of a 5.0 mustang in mine because they have larger internals. It is true that the input shaft is bigger. I made my own pilot bearing on the lathe to use it with the 2.3. The trans has held up just fine. They really get super mileage with even with the turbo on them. Mine is a blow through setup and am currently running 18lbs boost. Yes it is a daily too.
Funny.......you should mention this. I have no 'oil filter'. I guess someone before me must'a removed it.
Actually, there is some confusion about the 2.0. The German 2.0 was built pre '75. For a long time afterwards, only the 2.3 was available. But during the mid to late '80s Ford also built a 2.0 that is a small bore 2.3. This 2.0 was used in the Ranger and is not the same as the early '70s 2.0
The Jalopy Journal
