Long term reliability of the 2.3

[Jrel209]

Having had two Ecoboost Mustangs here are the things that are different between the Mustang and Ranger versions of the 2.3 that I am aware of;
1. Turbo Charger - Mustang has a pneumatic wastegate actuator and the Ranger has an electric one. The compressor outlets are in different locations.
2. Intake Manifold - Mustang has the throttle body on the front of the manifold log. Ranger has it in the center below the log.
3. Oil Filter Adapter - Mustang has a vertically mounted oil filter. Ranger has a horizontal mount and includes an oil cooler that uses engine coolant to warm the oil up quicker and control how hot it gets.
4. Front Engine Cover - The Ranger has provisions for and engine driven fan. Mustang uses an electric fan.
5. Cylinder Head - the Ranger has slightly different machining of the head with a corresponding revised head gasket for improved cooling that was a carry over from the Focus RS engine.

There may be more, these are the ones I am aware of.

Im not a mechanic or an engine engineer, so are these changes for the better or worse?

Sponsored

 

[Dgc333]

Im not a mechanic or an engine engineer, so are these changes for the better or worse?

1. Electric wastegate will give the ECU finer control over the boost curve - better.
Orientation of compressor outlet is for packaging everything under the hood - wash.
2. Intake manifold is for packaging under the hood - wash.
3. Oil filter orientation is for packaging - wash. Oil cooler is a plus for engine long term reliability - better.
4. Engine driven fan, not sure why they did that, maybe for improved airflow - wash.
5. Cylinder Head mods for improved cooling will improve long term reliability and support the extra load on the engine when towing - better.

 

[Langwilliams]

I watched a few videos on the "open deck" 2.3 in the RS. The early ones had major head gasket problems. This made me nervous about the 2.3. Then I saw they changed the head gaskets an some thought they were putting them on upside down an the problem was fixed.

 

[Dgc333]

I watched a few videos on the "open deck" 2.3 in the RS. The early ones had major head gasket problems. This made me nervous about the 2.3. Then I saw they changed the head gaskets an some thought they were putting them on upside down an the problem was fixed.

The major head gasket issue is they accidentally built engines with the standard 2.3 gasket, not the one they design to go with the revised head machining of the RS.

Not a design issue, a manufacturing screw up.

 

[VAMike]

Im not a mechanic or an engine engineer, so are these changes for the better or worse?

Neither--they're just optimizing the engine for a different application. E.g., the mechanical fan provides better cooling under extended high load at lower speeds (like you'd see in a loaded truck) vs an electric fan that has less parasitic loss under low load and the ability to max flow at low engine RPMs (useful in race cars where the max load is at high speeds, where airflow reduces the need for the fan to move air, and in mall runners where the max load is while parked in the heat with the A/C running).

 

[MountainGoat]

3. Oil filter orientation is for packaging - wash. Oil cooler is a plus for engine long term reliability - better.

As long as the oil cooler doesn't crack and mix coolant with the oil. This was an issue in my old Nissan with a transmission cooler and I eventually disconnected it ahead of time to prevent a blown trans.

 

[ControlNode]

I watched a few videos on the "open deck" 2.3 in the RS. The early ones had major head gasket problems. This made me nervous about the 2.3. Then I saw they changed the head gaskets an some thought they were putting them on upside down an the problem was fixed.

As an owner of this car the early problems were 100% (in my opinion) Ford finding an error with the original head gasket and just using other stock (non-RS 2.3 head gasket) that was "close enough" so they could get them to dealers in the advertised time frame. None of the early production RS head gaskets part numbers matched up to what any parts catalog called for the car having. Ford had a choice and I think it was gamble on the gasket not designed for the engine or cancel the Focus RS out right if they didn't meet that release dead line. I pre-ordered mine and was issued a VIN, then when something was found (I suspect the head gasket issue) to be a problem and all production was stopped, my VIN got cancelled. Once they found an "acceptable" solution production resumed and I got a new VIN on my order.

The major head gasket issue is they accidentally built engines with the standard 2.3 gasket, not the one they design to go with the revised head machining of the RS.

Not a design issue, a manufacturing screw up.

Nope, there is no way with inventory control that they built this engine in Spain for over a year and never asked why they still have stock on the correct head gasket. And those RS gaskets have never been found installed in a non-RS 2.3 so it's not like they were sending the wrong stock to the wrong lines for over a year either. Ever 2016 and most 2017s, until they switched to an updated RS 2.3 head gasket revision that fixed what ever was wrong with the original design started getting installed, were part of the recall and everyone got at a minimum a head gasket. If it was found to already be leaking you got a new head as well. My RS got a new head.

Also, I'm at over 88k miles. Lots of auto-x and some track time in there too. Oil has been changed when at 50% due to the severe usage the car sees.

Also, also: For about 16 hours you could buy the Ford Performance tune for the Focus RS in the US directly from Ford Performance. This was before the head gasket recall. I'm guessing Ford cooperate didn't share with Ford Performance the full details of the head gasket until a tune was released that would likely have caused many engine failure and then they were told to stop selling it, thus pulled the tune from the store. And to date, that tune has not been made it available again.

 

[D Fresh]

math comes into play now

the reliability of this engine is determined by the pages x post count, divided by the ppm of manganese in your oil at 4500 miles exactly, and then added to the viscosity of a fried egg on a hot texas summer day minus your IQ.

It's 2.



Right?

 

[ControlNode]

As long as the oil cooler doesn't crack and mix coolant with the oil. This was an issue in my old Nissan with a transmission cooler and I eventually disconnected it ahead of time to prevent a blown trans.

My mom's old Explorer had issues with the trans-cooler in the radiator. When you pop the over flowing over flow reservoir cap and it looks like a strawberry shake, there is a problem. Odd thing is my 86 Civic Si is well, old and the OE sandwich style oil cooler with a couple nipples on it for coolant lines has never failed. Almost 300k miles on that car now, I gave it to my daughter years ago.

 

[D Fresh]

As an owner of this car the early problems were 100% (in my opinion) Ford finding an error with the original head gasket and just using other stock (non-RS 2.3 head gasket) that was "close enough" so they could get them to dealers in the advertised time frame. None of the early production RS head gaskets part numbers matched up to what any parts catalog called for the car having. Ford had a choice and I think it was gamble on the gasket not designed for the engine or cancel the Focus RS out right if they didn't meet that release dead line. I pre-ordered mine and was issued a VIN, then when something was found (I suspect the head gasket issue) to be a problem and all production was stopped, my VIN got cancelled. Once they found an "acceptable" solution production resumed and I got a new VIN on my order.


Nope, there is no way with inventory control that they built this engine in Spain for over a year and never asked why they still have stock on the correct head gasket. And those RS gaskets have never been found installed in a non-RS 2.3 so it's not like they were sending the wrong stock to the wrong lines for over a year either. Ever 2016 and most 2017s, until they switched to an updated RS 2.3 head gasket revision that fixed what ever was wrong with the original design started getting installed, were part of the recall and everyone got at a minimum a head gasket. If it was found to already be leaking you got a new head as well. My RS got a new head.

Also, I'm at over 88k miles. Lots of auto-x and some track time in there too. Oil has been changed when at 50% due to the severe usage the car sees.

You obviously know more about it than I.


But from what I've ascertained it was as simple as the wrong gasket being stocked at the engine plant. From everything I've read the EB Mustang headgasket was used and the coolant passages do not match up.

Seems like a simple mistake. Having the advantage of hindsight it seems Ford doesn't care about on time deliveries on launch.

I think it's a stretch to say they did it on purpose to meet launch. For what reason? The head gasket issue basically killed the RS. So they put in in the wrong headgasket on purpose just to launch on time, but in the process killed their project? Doubtful.

 

[Dgc333]

As long as the oil cooler doesn't crack and mix coolant with the oil. This was an issue in my old Nissan with a transmission cooler and I eventually disconnected it ahead of time to prevent a blown trans.

Well anything can fail and just because it failed in your Nissan doesn't mean it will in the Ranger. My Focus ST had a similar cooler and I never heard of any issues with it.

 

[ControlNode]

You obviously know more about it than I.


But from what I've ascertained it was as simple as the wrong gasket being stocked at the engine plant. From everything I've read the EB Mustang headgasket was used and the coolant passages do not match up.

Seems like a simple mistake. Having the advantage of hindsight it seems Ford doesn't care about on time deliveries on launch.

I think it's a stretch to say they did it on purpose to meet launch. For what reason? The head gasket issue basically killed the RS. So they put in in the wrong headgasket on purpose just to launch on time, but in the process killed their project? Doubtful.

My disagreement with that is that there is no way that a simple stock mistake goes on for over a year, RS engines were build from about Nov/Dec of 2015 through June/July of 2017 with the wrong gasket. I could see a batch of engines having the mistake. Also, when they recalled them why did they not use the original revisions they had built that would have been in a warehouse somewhere to do the recall? They had to wait on a new revision to get designed, produced and tested, then enough inventory stocked up to issue a recall. I still think the team was told if they can't deliver a produce by a given date to dealers Ford was going to can it. And maybe it would just Ford US that told the team that, remember we never had the RS here before.

 

[D Fresh]

My disagreement with that is that there is no way that a simple stock mistake goes on for over a year, RS engines were build from about Nov/Dec of 2015 through June/July of 2017 with the wrong gasket. I could see a batch of engines having the mistake. Also, when they recalled them why did they not use the original revisions they had built that would have been in a warehouse somewhere to do the recall? They had to wait on a new revision to get designed, produced and tested, then enough inventory stocked up to issue a recall. I still think the team was told if they can't deliver a produce by a given date to dealers Ford was going to can it. And maybe it would just Ford US that told the team that, remember we never had the RS here before.

Maybe an engineering mistake? Redesigned the block and head yet forgot about the gasket?

I don't know.


I was under the impression it was only early models effected, not all of them.

But I do know that, currently, Ford doesn't give two shits about launching a model on time.

 

[Dr. Zaius]

It's 2.



Right?

It's actually 42.

 

[Floyd]

My mom's old Explorer had issues with the trans-cooler in the radiator. When you pop the over flowing over flow reservoir cap and it looks like a strawberry shake, there is a problem. Odd thing is my 86 Civic Si is well, old and the OE sandwich style oil cooler with a couple nipples on it for coolant lines has never failed. Almost 300k miles on that car now, I gave it to my daughter years ago.

As long as we are being anecdotal....
I used to carpool 30 miles to work with a friend. He bought a new Honda Civic at about the same time that I bought a new Tempo.
The Tempo got about 28 MPG with or without extra passengers.
The Honda got 40 MPG with just the driver and 31MPG when I rode with him.
At 60, 000 miles ,the Honda was burning a quart of oil per week (300 miles.)
At 180,000 miles the Tempo was still running as new when a a kid in a fullsized Chrysler ran a stop sign and totaled the Tempo.
In 2008 we bought a 2.3L Ford Escape, I towed my Travel Trailer for about 9 years, then passed it along to my son, who has driven it for 5 years.
He is about to buy a new Maverick so I am about to get the Escape back, to pass it along to my Granddaughter.
Still willing to compare reliability records of any Pacific Rim vehicle with any one of my 14 new Fords, owned over nearly half a century.

Sponsored