2.3l vs 4.6 Ford heads

[98oilhead]

Way off topic I'm sure. I'm having a great deal of trouble finding "shorty" headers for my 2.3l Kent motor, lots of headers for Pinto but they pass under the car, won't work in this application. The header for turbo motors are pretty common and might be able to modify, not so for normally aspirated.

So the question. Are the port spacing/head bolt pattern the same on 4.6 V8 the same as on the 2.3L? Would open up another way to make headers "happen".

Nick

[coffee break]

I'm puzzled. I've got a Kent motor but it's listed as a 1.6L and was available in Pinto. What did a 2.3L Kent motor come out of?

[Kitcat]

The 2.3L engine was used in many Fords in mid 70's on, including the Pinto. It might not have been a X-flow variant but a successor engine instead, dunno. They were also turbo charged and used in T-Birds AFAIK, among other applications.

[fastg]

The 2.3 was called the Lima. a 2.3 single overhead can 4 cylinder available in NA and Turbo form. The Turbo was fitted in Turbo Coupes, Mustang SVO and Merkur XR4ti. In NA form they put out 89 bhp, that is factory quoted crank bhp!!! I believe there was a twin plug motor that put out a whopping 105 bhp. I have played a lot with these engines in the turbo form a friend did a full restoration on an XR4ti. Even in turbo form a boat anchor is the fitting end for one of these.

 

Graham

[1turbofocus]

You are correct but I wouldnt say a boat anchor , I can easilly make over 350whp with them and have taken them over 500whp , the 2.5 is the better choice that came in the ranger also a Lima SOHC Engine, more TQ for sure if you have to stay with the Lima SOHC Engine

 

Did you check with Esslinger on the header ?

 

Tom