Is the 2.3 an interference engine?
 

I recently bought the '84 2.3 5-speed (2WD) that I've been driving & repairing for some months. Although somewhat beaten-up, its still a tough little runabout at 215K miles.

This truck has its third engine which pulls well. I don't know when the timing belt was last changed OR the year of the motor.

Is the 2.3 an interference engine - will the valves and pistons contact if the timing belt goes?

Where can I find the engine serial no. to verify the year?

Thank you, all input appreciated,

Gordon

According to the attached chart, the original 84 2.3L was not an interference engine. However, some of the 85~86 were. Since the engine is not original, it might possibly be interference.

Some Ford truck engines do not have serial numbers. I don't know if that was the case with your Ranger engine though.

http://www.forparts.com/daycoford.htm

Thank you Bob. I'll drop by a dealer to get a better idea of the engine year. (Hopefully)

Gordon

That's odd. I wonder if it was only for part of 1986? My parents had a 1986 Ranger 2.3L and the timing belt broke twice due to neglect. It was back on the road the same day with a new timing belt both times. The engine was original to the truck. I'll try and find the VIN number of it to see if it has an E like that site says it should.

The 2.3 has never been an interference motor. Their information is wrong.

The block never changed since it was employed as an engine in the Pinto. The heads changed combustion chamber and exhaust/intake port design over the years, but the physical heads stay'd the same size and basic design up through its days. This includes the 2.5's as well.

The valve train never had a cam big enough to dive deep enough into the cylinder to pose an interference possibility.

The Lima platform evolved over its ~30 year life span, from the 2.0, 2.3, and 2.5, but never once was it an interference motor.

****
Going back and looking over that chart, I'm betting they are concidering the 85/86 deisel 2.3 in the ranger to be intereference. Which may perfectly well be, I know nothing about the 2.3 deisels that Ford threw into our trucks other than I know they were still Lima based and I thought they were just modified gas motors to be deisel compliant, and in doing so this may have created issues where an interference valve train could have been a possibility.
****

I looked at the chart again and also at some other info and I believe that you are correct about the diesels.

VIN code E in 85~86 is for the diesel and it is the only 2.3L Ranger engine listed as interference in the Dayco chart.

VIN code A is for 2.3L gasoline engines. 83~84 were carbureted and 85-97 were fuel injected. All are non-interference.

I guess that solves it then.

About the diesels...I do not think they were Lima based. IIRC, they were Mitsubishi engines.

I think your right