Ford Focus RS Forum banner
21 - 36 of 36 Posts
All the increase in displacement between the 2.0 and 2.3 is in the longer stroke.

My questions is: Does the Duratec 2.0 block bolt right into the RS or is machining required? For a previous-gen block, this looks remarkably like the ST block. Or is this an ST block improperly being called a Duratec?
The ST block is a duratec block.[emoji6]
Not from 2010 on, according to Wiki, it's an Ecoboost. It's the same block I am using to build my 2.3 shortblock.



Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_EcoBoost_engine#2.0_L_EcoBoost_I-4

"A 2.0-L version was first seen in the 2008 Ford Explorer America concept.[SUP][29][/SUP] The engine was rated at 275 hp (205 kW; 279 PS) and 280 lb⋅ft (380 N⋅m).

It is the first EcoBoost engine to include twin independent variable cam timing (Ti-VCT), with advertised 10—20% better fuel economy while maintaining the performance of 3.0-L V6s.[SUP][30][/SUP][SUP][31][/SUP]
This engine is derived from the 2.0-L Mazda L engine block used by Ford in the North American Focus MK3, but equipped with unique heads, fuel injection system, and Ford's Ti-VCT.

It should not be confused with the Mazda 2.3 DISI Turbo, which also features direct injection along with turbocharging, but shares little else aside from the same engine block.


The 2.0-L EcoBoost engine used in North American vehicles is now produced at the Cleveland engine plant in Brookpark, OH."

255 PS (188 kW; 252 hp) @5500 rpm, 270 lb⋅ft (366 N⋅m) @2000—4500 rpm[SUP][40][/SUP]

 
  • Like
Reactions: GoodbyeGolfR
Discussion starter · #23 ·
For those who don’t know Dead Hook and Tune+ has already built this combination for A focus RS. Yes it in fact bolt right into place into an RS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Discussion starter · #24 ·
Not from 2010 on, according to Wiki, it's an Ecoboost. It's the same block I am using to build my 2.3 shortblock.

View attachment 253578

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_EcoBoost_engine#2.0_L_EcoBoost_I-4

"A 2.0-L version was first seen in the 2008 Ford Explorer America concept.[SUP][29][/SUP] The engine was rated at 275 hp (205 kW; 279 PS) and 280 lb⋅ft (380 N⋅m).

It is the first EcoBoost engine to include twin independent variable cam timing (Ti-VCT), with advertised 10—20% better fuel economy while maintaining the performance of 3.0-L V6s.[SUP][30][/SUP][SUP][31][/SUP]
This engine is derived from the 2.0-L Mazda L engine block used by Ford in the North American Focus MK3, but equipped with unique heads, fuel injection system, and Ford's Ti-VCT.

It should not be confused with the Mazda 2.3 DISI Turbo, which also features direct injection along with turbocharging, but shares little else aside from the same engine block.


The 2.0-L EcoBoost engine used in North American vehicles is now produced at the Cleveland engine plant in Brookpark, OH."

255 PS (188 kW; 252 hp) @5500 rpm, 270 lb⋅ft (366 N⋅m) @2000—4500 rpm[SUP][40][/SUP]

I should of specified it’s duratec based. If you’d like more info konig the mzr duratec FB group if you’d like. Part compatibility in our blocks is amazing... Heck the crankshaft and all the bearings are interchangeable in the 2.3 disi the 2.0 ecoboost and the 2.3l ecoboost.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
All the increase in displacement between the 2.0 and 2.3 is in the longer stroke.

My questions is: Does the Duratec 2.0 block bolt right into the RS or is machining required? For a previous-gen block, this looks remarkably like the ST block. Or is this an ST block improperly being called a Duratec?
You can find a version of the 2l duratec engine as far back as 2000
 
The ST block is a duratec block.[emoji6]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The 2013+ block is an ecoboost because it's aluminum, correct? You are using an iron block?
 
EcoBoost and Duratec are marketing names that Ford uses very ambiguously. Ford calls the Mk3 ST engine an EcoBoost, but the bare block appears to be the same as the Duratec....with the differences being the head and some internals.
 
The 2013+ block is an ecoboost because it's aluminum, correct? You are using an iron block?
The block in the pictures is aluminum and looks like the ST block I ordered from Panda. I wouldn't put an iron block into this already nose-heavy car unless A) it was super strong and B) I was only going drag racing.
 
The block in the pictures is aluminum and looks like the ST block I ordered from Panda. I wouldn't put an iron block into this already nose-heavy car unless A) it was super strong and B) I was only going drag racing.
Ok my bad, after doing a little googling, all of the engine names are interchangeable. I was suffering under some false pretenses that I picked up about 15years ago when my Svt focus was under the knife at the dealer. Turns out that you can't just order parts for a zetec when you are working on a 2l duratec st. Funny how cosworth f'd up the machine work back then too. When you work under the umbrella of a company like Ford I guess you save face while Ford takes the rap
 
Ok my bad, after doing a little googling, all of the engine names are interchangeable. I was suffering under some false pretenses that I picked up about 15years ago when my Svt focus was under the knife at the dealer. Turns out that you can't just order parts for a zetec when you are working on a 2l duratec st. Funny how cosworth f'd up the machine work back then too. When you work under the umbrella of a company like Ford I guess you save face while Ford takes the rap
The zetec was knows as duratec in Europe though. Why do you say Cosworth messed up back then. The SVTF zetec is pretty bullet proof.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
 
I believe it goes zetec -> duratec -> ecoboost

Zetec and duratec hardly shared anything in common, but the zetec in Europe were also called duratecs

I want to build a 2.5 l bottom end and wonder if it'll just bolt to our head?
 
I believe it goes zetec -> duratec -> ecoboost

Zetec and duratec hardly shared anything in common, but the zetec in Europe were also called duratecs

I want to build a 2.5 l bottom end and wonder if it'll just bolt to our head?
I'd be more concerned about whether the 2.5 block bolts up to our PTU. Also the 2.5 I believe is a NA motor, not turbo. The 2.5 isn't just a longer stroke, the bore is larger as well. It would probably need expensive sleeving to deal with boost.
 
21 - 36 of 36 Posts