40 hp increas4
 

I am looking to add about 40 hp to my 2011 2.3l Ranger with auto tranny. I suspect it might be doable, but I don't know if it can be done without adding aftermarket cams, intake manifold, modifying heads. I hope it can be done with an air filter setup, maybe headers, tuner. , exhaust pipes/muffler/free flow cat. I have the feeling as I write this, cams are going to be required. I am looking for tried and true combinations since my days of trouble shooting state of the art products have passed due to lack of patience now known as wisdom. I am quite proficient on fuel injection tuning of Alpha N systems such as Daytona ecu o2 systems, but that system is not made for the 2.3l engine.

Any and all tried and true combinations which might add 40 hp or so will be appreciated. Many thanks. BTW, not interested in NOS or turbos.

Leo.

wake up from your dream

A turbo is what you should be researching

:stupid:

Well, I am a bit surprised that you had the time to write comments considering the time you probably need to spend checking the rusted clothes hanger holding your muffler up.

A simple "it can't be done" IMO would have sufficed. Obviously, I have joined a forum were some demonstrate severely limited talent, knowledge of internal combustion engines and manners.

In an effort to "make peace", allow me to direct you to the MIT published papers on the MIT website dedicated to internal combustion engine research. You might start with the papers on "spark plugs", assuming you find the time between your "projects."

Leo.

The old days of the manufacturer dropping a round flat can on a carb and a handy pipe for moving exhaust to the rear of the vehicle are long past.

With the rising fuel prices and the flood of more fuel efficient vehicles from overseas in the '70's, the Big 3 had to make some changes.

Pretty much every vehicle sold in N. America had a Cold Air Intake(CAI) by 1980.
All "independent" dyno testing of current add-on CAI products have shown either a drop in power or no change in power.
Stock air systems are pretty much state of the art as far as function.
But for looks, an air intake system can be jazzed up, just like putting on nicer looking wheels, and if done right you will not lose any power.

Exhaust systems were also "tuned" to gain better MPG and power, unless a vehicle is specifically designed to be sold as a "racing" type vehicle, exhaust will be tuned for mid-range power.
A tuned exhaust system generates negative pressure at the exhaust ports in a specific RPM range, low or mid or high range.
The myth of "back pressure" comes from this tuning, people would remove the tuned factory exhaust system and install "bigger" pipes for more flow.
With the bigger pipes the engine couldn't get enough "velocity" in the pipes so couldn't generate negative pressure at the exhaust ports.
This resulted in less power, so their conclusion, "engines must need back pressure", oops, wrong.

Tuning of the exhaust is to generate the lowest pressure at the exhaust ports in the RPM range you want, most "headers" are low-range designs, but you can get high-range as well.
These do not increase power, they just move when the lowest pressure at the exhaust ports occur in the RPM range, so with low-range headers you would "feel" the best power starting at a lower RPM and then start losing it at a lower RPM than a mid-range header.


Factory tuning of the "chip" is done for best MPG and power for stock engine, unless you change the parameters of the engine internally there is no reason to change programming on factory chip.


In your 2011 Ranger you will have the Duratec 23NS engine rated as 143 horse power

A 40hp increase would be a 28% increase, that type of increase would require massive increase in the air volume the engine can process per cylinder, so a turbo would be the best bet.

The 4.0l SOHC is rated as 210hp because of increased air volume, maybe sell the 2.3l and find a 4.0l SOHC Ranger.

Engine power is directly related to the amount(volume) of air it can process per cylinder, the more air that can be pulled, or pushed, in the more fuel that can be burned, and fuel = power.
A "larger" engine can pull in more air, so has more power, a turbo pushes in more air so increases power, a "larger" cam pulls in more air so increases power.
Fundamentals of this are pretty basic, more air = more fuel = more power


Conversion to an electric radiator fan and removing the belt driven fan can increase HP and MPG, it isn't much but isn't nothing either.

First of all, you aren't going to find much help around here if you spout off to everyone like the Internet CEO your first day here. This place has an abundance of useful resources; it's your job to learn how to utilize them.

If your knowledge of ICEs is as great as you claim it to be, you should already know that your chances of gaining 40+hp out of an engine that small with simple "plug and play" type modifications are next to nothing. If you wanted horsepower, you shouldn't have bought a 2.5L (IMO).

But if you still want those gains out of that engine, you'll probably need to shift your focus to a turbo system or other, more "advanced" mods for lack of a better term.

Thanks Ron. Yes, putting in a larger engine would accomplish the goal. But, I like to build engines.
It appears I really need to find the correct efi tuning software and hardware before I move forward. Getting 1.1 hp per cubic inch out of a two valve, single spark plug-pushrod motor is not expensive. This motor seems a bit more advanced. It seems that the impediment is there is not much development of mid-range performance parts for this engine.

Justin, if you want to add to the technical discussion, please do so. Otherwise, save your effort as far as I am concerned.

Leo.

I got some stickers around here somewhere good for at least 10hp a piece.

At the wheels?

Yea, stickers don't suffer from drivetrain loss like other mods

1956/1957 were the first years that Detroit engines broke the 1hp per cu/in barrier
1956 Chrysler 300B had a multi-carb 354 that had 355hp
Chevy did it in '57 with their 283 engine but used fuel injection to get 283hp
Just FYI, I like old facts, lol.

Most current engines don't get 1hp per ci

If you get 1.5hp per ci on a normally aspirated engine you will be doing very good indeed

2.3l is 140ci making 143hp so you are stock at 1.02hp per ci which is good
You would probably make 1.05hp per ci when engine is cold, runs richer, lol.
Doubt EFI tuning would pick up .08hp on a stock engine, maybe .03hp like when engine is cold

4.0l OHV is 244ci making 160hp, that's 0.65hp per ci
4.0l SOHC is 244ci making 207hp, that's 0.85hp per ci


Current Shelby GT500 Mustang
5.8l is 354ci making 662hp, that's 1.87hp per ci, but not normally aspirated, lol.

Pro builds can get in the 3hp to 5hp per ci range, bring your check book and a "fainting pillow", lol

I only installed a Magnaflow muffler and electric fan. Seems to have picked up a small tad of bottom end power. Maybe 3 hp top. They are many websites that cater to the 2.3L Duratic engine. Not sure if how much or if all of them will work on a 23N motor. I remember when the Lima 2.3l were popular on the dirt tracks and short ovals. These motors were modified to push around 190hp on the dyno. Seems like Cosworth makes some heads but they are expensive. So with that said I would think another 40 for the 23N would be doable. Heads, cam, tuning, exhaust and a intake. Our trucks do not have a performance cold air intake or a performance exhaust from the factory. They don't even have a good tune in my opinion. I think that is why so many people have trouble with them stubbling or slight miss at lower cruising rpms. I think she is too lean from the factory for higher fuel economy. Good luck on your effort.

What kind of Masshole are you?

I thought it was pretty funny, personally. Try getting a sense of humor; it'll take you much further in life.

Maybe you should follow your own advice. But before you open your mouth, try not being a douche. Good rule to follow :)

That comment was from one Masshole to another. That's what we call eachother.

Didn't know about the Masshole thing. I just figured you were another 14er that likes to get offended about everything. Consider it noted. Carry on.

Trust me, I've got a pretty good sense of humor. That pic is damn funny. It almost got me in trouble bc my boss knew I couldn't be laughing about anything work related in a meeting haha

Shelby Stanga lets you use the internet? Not worried at all my friend. It was funny, but I have seen lotsa dudes in other forums start talking crap to guys immediately. Always been a fan of trying to help someone first.

Back to OP though. How much has changed in the engines from 2002 to present?

Never owned a truck before, but decided I needed one for work. It's got some quirks to work out, but it's a fun little vehicle.

http://www.cosworth.com/products/pow...package-range/
Cosworth makes a stage 1 kit for a FR-S/BRZ sports car 2.0L 4 cylinder that increases 40 hp at 4,100RPM and improves peak power by 33 hp with merely a high-flow panel air filter (touted on the internet as useless), low temp thermostat (touted on the internet as counterproductive), computer tune (touted on the internet as not worth the money), and complete exhaust (headers are worthless, right Interweb?). Its already tuned to be a sports car motor, and they still squeezed a bunch more out with a few select mods.
BTW, +40 hp with a turbo? How about +~140? I got one and it only uses 8psi to do it (Not a Ford).
For those that think there is no power to be had, you're doing it wrong. Suck less. Just because you don't have any good ideas doesn't mean no one else will.
Factory cars are a massive compromise in tuning and parts. Especially Ford's run-of-the-mill vehicles.
There are not a lot of good parts available. I am surprised to not see talk of conversions to the more powerful versions of this motor.