why dont people use theses engines? i know there getting more comon in the mk2 escorts now.but there alot better engine then the zetec, yet i've had mine for sale for ages now, and no1 seems to buy them.

 

heavy and not very tuneable. Plus the heads crack

 

there 100's about bud, complete engine with aux n box maybe worth Ł200?

Ive got loads lying about in me lockups

 

you can tune them

https://passionford.com/forum/showth...=207757&page=9

just takes lots of money

 

So untuneable Ford used them in the Maxi kit cars

They are a great engine - approx 150bhp and 150lb/ft out of the box.

I feel the downside is there aren't many 'bolt on' mods out there, but with a bit of cash you can make them fast.

 

yup, im aiming for 280+ BHP in mine

its because Burtons dont sell bolt on mods that it aint loved

 

people say not tuneable but theres everything out there like cams and verniers, throttle bodys, manifolds, induction kits, gasflow the head. you'd have to spend over 1k on a zetec to get 150 bhp, and i've had 3 rs2000, i've got 2 mates thats had 1 a piece and not 1 problem, and i've never heard of the head cracking. maybe put some water in and this wouldnt happen.

 

Mr freak power ( aka Andrew Lindley/Andrew@A.L.D ) is the man to talk to about this engine or parts for the RS2K

 

they make more torque than the zetec?

would love one in a mk4 van one day (if theyd fit, but i beleive they do!?)

 

I really miss mine They really are brilliant, reliable cars!

Have thought about selling the cossie and building another mk6

 

they only crack between the valve seats on not well maintained cars

 

i had one i used to cane its arse evey were and it never missed a let me down, that had a full exhaust, de-cat, induction kit, superchip, and valve things (forgotten what there called) removed on manifold and uprated fpr that made 163 bhp iirc at wheels on rr

 

they do, you just need to modify the mounting seat on the chain side of the block / bay.

 

one of my old ones, standard internals, all n/a

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsk_dtjpnIA

 

keep the cossy just buy one and have a project

you had a white one with OZ's didnt ya?

 

why do people fit the 2.3 then if the 2.0 is so tuneable?

Genuine question not a dig.

 

It has more torque also when running t/b's they are pritty quick

but they dont like to rev and I personaly wouldnt run a 2.3 n/a as every one ive driven bores the life out of me as not liking to rev past 5500

2.2 Im building is best of both worlds, stroker that will like to be revved to fook lol

go on to RS2000-16V.com for more info, good lads on there.

 

To get an easy increase in displacement... they still use the 2.0 head as it flows better!

 

2.3 16v head is just as good

2.0L head on a 2.3 block raises the comp slightly.

If i was doing it again, i'd just use a 2.3 galaxy motor and work that, rather than swapping bits off the 2L

 

Paul_RS- do you have flow figures of both Paul?

 

Id like another rs2k

fantastic car for the money and bombproof as far as im concerned.


Been thinkin about doing the conversion into my td escort van at some point

 

2.3 bottom end
2.0 top end
comp ratio is around 10.8
it needs to be round the 10.3
normally they run 9.8
head gaskets are a problem
the 2.3 needs balancer shafts removed
cams in the 2.3 are the same as in the rs2k engine
etc
etc

 

cams arent the same and head gaskets are also great triple layer as standard and will run on low comp builds standard.

 

C/R is higher than 9.8, more like 10.8 and a 2.3/2.0 hybrid is closer to 11.8
Heads are not the same, 2.0 has better squish



a lad called tony gave me the knowledge

 

which tony i wonder

jim measured it all with a pippette and a bit of glass and used maths etc to work out this sort of stuff
he even went as far as figuring out the thickness of the headgasket when it was compressed to get that additional volume

 

.. if he didn't the figures would be meaningless

 

so the figures he figured would be figured right, right

 

I don't have figures for either head

I'm pretty sure the main difference is cams though?

 

Oh, right. I was wondering how you knew the 2.3 head was 'as good' as the 2.0 one.

 

ford list the cams as being the same part number

if someone can veryfiy this please?

 

i'm sure i've got a 2.3 head somewhere

 

I mean just as good as a base to start with if you are going down the headwork route. If you are doing an entire 2.3 there isn't much point getting a 2L head to replace the 2.3. If that makes sense?

 

The 2.3 head will provide a lower C/R and the combustion chamber doesnt have good Sqish so all in all will not provide as much power gains in simply bolting an 2.0 head on would give you. The cams are also definately not the same.

 

I love the I4 in my RS2000 its been spot on since it was rebuilt by Minirotty over a year ago now