Numpty Duratec Question.

[Mickrick]

O.K. here go's... Duratec 23 MZR Family. Codes are EW, built in Mexico for the American Focus. NS, built in Good ol' U.S of A for the Ranger and Mazda B Series, and the 23 E for California emmissions.

So what is the DHE 423 that SBD motorsport have on thier website? Thier own number maybe? Am I missing some?

Any particular one to look for, cosidering the internals will be binned anyway?

 

Thanks in advance

Mick.

 

The older I get, the faster I was!

[mic]

DHE 420 = 2LTR

DHE423=2.3LTR

[Mickrick]

But what's the DHE denote?

 

The older I get, the faster I was!

[Dobuy]

DHE is Duratec HE which is the generic term for the range of motors used by Ford

[Mickrick]

Ah, I see. So it doesn't realy tell you anything you wouldn't already know.

Is there any difference between any of them, that really matters, as long as it's an I4 23? Like I said, interneals get binned anyway.

 

The older I get, the faster I was!

[mic]

A lot of the the new 2.3 engines have balance shafts in them and a large gear on the crank. Also they use a different timing chain and gears etc.

 

Mick

[AMMO]

Mickrick

 

The Duratec has been around since 2000. Variations are starting to appear.

 

I have three 2.3 Duratecs in stock and they are all different! There is a 2.3 Ranger, a 2.3 Focus / Transit and what I think is a Mazda / Focus PZEV ? variable cam timing engine. The heads are all different. There are different cam chains, tensioners and guides, sprockets, pulleys, cranks with balance shafts, etc. To complicate matters the 2.3 Mazda / Focus? is marked 2.3 / 2 lt DI. Don't know if DI stands for direct injection or Diesel. The block is beefier and has more webbing.

 

What I have started doing is building hybrid engines with Ranger bottom ends and Focus top ends. Of course if you are going for a steel crank you can start with anything. You can also delete the balance shaft and you end up with a heavier but fully counterbalanced crank. They have been used with success like this.

 

Basically I'm in a privileged situation where I can offer what is best for the application and power output. For example I am currently quoting for a 2.3 to go in an Escort. Big power not a priority, 250 bhp, so I will start with a Transit engine and delete the balance shaft. Also quoting for a 280 bhp engine for an Elise. For this I will use a Ranger bottom end and either a ported Mondeo or Focus top end.

 

There are usually enough parts around to nail a decent engine together ❗ 😬

 

What is is you are trying to do? If you let me know I might be able to help. I might even have a bare block if you are going to go for a steel crank.

 

 

 

AMMO

[Mickrick]

Hi Ammo, thanks very much for the information. I'm not 100% sure what my final spec will be right now, but I'm trying to gather together as much information as I can, before I make my mind up.

From my notes here, the Ranger and mazda B series is the same block (23NS?) If thats the one you say has more webbing/beefier block, then maybe this would be the one to go for, for big power. i.e. less distortion? (in theory)

The PZEV that's the 23E, California emissinns one. (Built in Mexico) Your right, bloody confusing!

When the time comes Ammo, I'll more than likely give you a shout, but as I say, just gathering my stuff/information together for now, and I don't want to waste anyones time asking for quotes untill I know what I want, and the cash is burning a hole in my pocket. This is a long term project, I get just as much fun out of the engineering, as the driving.

I will be going for steel crank though.

 

Edited to say, and VVT

Thanks all, for the input

 

The older I get, the faster I was!

 

Edited by - Mickrick on 4 Nov 2007 19:08:12

[mic]

And to add to the list is the Mazda turbo engine.

 

 

 

Edited by - mic on 4 Nov 2007 19:28:39

[Mickrick]

Well I haven't ruled out forcing it in!

 

But I think it would be blower rather than turbo.

 

The older I get, the faster I was!

 

Edited by - Mickrick on 4 Nov 2007 19:43:13

[AMMO]

And a Direct Injection with different pistons and head with eight inlet ports. Truly complictated.

 

Every now and again I open up an engine and think WTF is this now? Just the other day I discovered new chain guides for the old engine. Thankfully there are no engine fundemental changes so you can usually use old parts in new engines and new parts in old engines. They haven't messed around with the heads and blocks not to make them interchangeable. Yet. Best not to assume that will remain to be the case.

 

The Duratec is built in Hiroshima, Dearborn, Valencia and Chiuhuahua. With a global engine there are variations for different markets. The PZEV (Partial Zero Emissions Vehicle, whatever that means? Probably means that it makes Zero Emissions when it is not running) is sold in California and New York State I believe. The whole thing is in a state of flux and is changing all the time I suppose.

 

Regarding forced induction I would be more inclined to go towards a turbo rather than a supercharger. Probably less heat issues and more power potential. Personally I still think N/A is the way to go in a Seven.

 

AMMO

[Mickrick]

You don't think a supercharger would be better for bottom end, or have they ironed out the issues with lag now?

 

Some of the production cars seem to have gone back to superchargers.

 

The older I get, the faster I was!

 

Edited by - Mickrick on 5 Nov 2007 08:21:23

[Dobuy]

Some details here on wikipedia here

[MikeE]

 

 

I suspect that was a typo and Ammo meant go for a S/C not a turbo

 

Ammo?

 

 

 

R400 Duratec Build and Modification Pictures

here

[dannylt]

I think Ammo is just thinking loads-power, in which case turbo is more efficient. But I think a turbo is way hotter, a low pressure SC with no lag should be perfect. I just haven't tried one yet!

 

[AMMO]

No I meant a turbo.

 

According to a friend who has been involved with both superchargers and turbos, he thinks that turbos are preferable. We were talking about a forced induction Hyabusa. I remember a snippet of converation that revolved around induction temperatures. I suppose induction temperatures are dependant on boost level, fuelling and size of intercooler. I know very little about the subject of forced induction so I wouldn't be the person to ask.

 

It seems obvious to me that if everybody has got their knickers in a twist over superchargers that it is my duty to confuse the issue by using the word turbo every now and again. 😬

 

AMMO

[Mickrick]

When you were talking temperatures, I thought you were refering to the heat generated from the jacket, as the turbo's I've seen (Like the 32 liter MTU engines I work on) have a water cooled jacket, whereas maybe the superchargers didn't.

 

The thing is, I'm thinking along the lines of something which will get it's grunt from low down, as opposed to revving the nuts off it. Not that I don't want it to rev, but I don't want all the power up there.

 

I was trolling through the Rotrex website, at thier superchargers, and they seem more like a belt driven turbo to me, they certainly seem to run at similar rpm. But you wouldn't get the lag.

 

It's all hyperthetical realy, but I like to keep an open mind regarding options. That's why I looked at the Honda units. I might do a bit of reaserch on the Mazda rotary engine, now that would be different

 

So Ammo, just to re-cap, which block would you recomend for somthing to blow the backside out of my breeches!

 

Cheers,

Mick.

 

The older I get, the faster I was!

[AMMO]

Get a ride with Danny LT in his 2.2 Duratec. Torque and revs. Based on either a 2 litre or 2.3 stock block. Over-square design, big valves. My personal favourite and I think Jonny Leroux's from bookatrack. He had nice things to say about Danny's car.

 

More torque, less revs? A bored 2260 cc to 2340 cc? Based on the beefier block? If you have one to hand. The stock blocks survive OK, so not neccessary in my opinion.

 

Beefier block for forced induction? If that turns you on. You need to build a decent engine to then add all the weight and complication of a supercharger or turbo. Not my cup of tea. Too complicated and difficult to fit in a narrow bodied car. OK in a wide-bodied one.

 

Not saying that it is wrong, just that it leaves me cold. Personally I would rather have a 2.2. I like the idea that I can rev an engine without hitting the rev limiter all the time.

 

AMMO

[Mickrick]

Was having a natter with the bloke on the boat next to us the other day, Vince Wetton, he had a short stint as a professional driver.

He was telling me he had an Evo 5 which produced 320hp, and 611nm. No that turns me on. Not bad from 2000cc, but it did drink a liter per mile

I think he said a bloke called John Hook built it.

 

The older I get, the faster I was!

[dannylt]

320bhp is a bit limp - after all there was a factory version with 400bhp, and plenty of aftermarket conversion for 600+. But I very much doubt it would suit a Caterham!

[Mickrick]

Well, like I have commented before, and I'm sure there'll be loads who dissagree, my personal opinion, is that it's the tourque that counts. What's the point in having loads of h.p. if the thing drops off the cam when you drop bellow 7,000rpm. That's tickety Boo for the track, but gets a bit tedious for a road car. But of course quoting big h.p. figures are good for bar stool driving.

Just for the record, I'm not making any reference, to any comments on BC, it's just my opinion.

I agree, no good for a seven, but it's just part of a discussion.

Of course I asked a question, and I appreciate the replies, and advice. No one knows everything, so it's good to get other peoples point of view, and tap into the vast wealth of knowlage here on BC.

320 h.p. may not be a lot by todays standards, but I was making a point about the 611 nm. Limp or not, he won the 2001 Siverstone Tyres BTRDA rally series with it.

 

The older I get, the faster I was!

[timbo]

When I was with Jack Frost @ holeshot getting my busa mapped he showed me a few bhp/torque trace maps for various sized turbo busa's - one in particular is the 500bhp Westi referenced to in this forum. We talked about turbo applications for sometime but I couldn't help leaving somewhat disullusioned... he showed me the map for this particular turbo busa - the power band was so narrow.... in low gears foot to the floor when outside boost the performance was fecking abmisal.. then suddenly 200bhp in just over 1 second as the turbo ramped up.... don't get me wrong, while the kick in the back would be astronomical the power IMO is so unusable for fast road or even track performance. You'd spend 1/2 your time wondering not if but when your going to loose the rear end. I would suggest that 1/2 this power & torque would probably be much quicker point to point on road and track use. I came to the conclusion that less is in fact more. So having made that decision if I do seek more power from the busa I'll go 1400 NA with cams.

 

BUSA POWWWER

[simonbell]

"Less is indeed more"

 

Quote entered into list of quotes to remind Timbo about in the future........

 

 

 

Simon Bell - Caterham 7 Duratec R

I`ve seen the future.....and it`s powered by duratec Check out the website here

[timbo]

put that that into nise7ens dictionnary, chief

 

BUSA POWWWER

[AMMO]

Mickrick

 

"What's the point in having loads of h.p. if the thing drops off the cam when you drop bellow 7,000rpm." 🤔

 

None of my engines behave like this. They have more torque than most things. They tick over and are built more like endurance race engines than sprinters. The 2,340cc made around 218 ft lb. The 2,2 litre around 210 ft lb.

 

Even my 260 bhp 2 litre is very flexible. I haven't got to the stage where I wish it had more power (or torque). It has "only" 180 ft lb approx., but that is OK for me. In fact going to work on back roads I can make good progress without going much over 4,000 rpm. I can drive it in 4th and 5th. 5th being an over-drive around 21 mph per 1,000 rpm so 4,000 rpm is over 80 mph. Not lacking in torque at all. Plus if I squeeze the loud pedal I have another 4,500 rpm to go 😬 Works better if you have enough energy to move your hand to drop a gear or two 😬

 

Have you had a ride in a Duratec Seven yet? Even the cooking 2.3 litre 250 bhp engines are quite something. Ask Rob Grigsby. He loves his the way it is and all my attempts tto have him upgrade have fallen on deaf ears. If you haven't had a ride, you really need to so that you can gauge what sort of engine you want to end up with.

 

Give me a call if you like and maybe together we can come up with an engine spec. that suits your requirements. If you have the hots for forced induction and want to go this route no amount of my telling you how good a N/A engine is going to sway you though is it? I happen to have a Rotrex sitting on my desk and I suppose one day it will be fitted to something. Just hope it will be a wide bodied car rather than a Series 3 because the latter would be a packaging nightmare.

 

AMMO