Mazda3 Forums banner

1 - 20 of 47 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Because in my country there is only 2.0 engine on the market .....if I wanna build a 2.0 to 2.3...what should I do...what parts should I need?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
Oh God, why go through an engine swap for just 10 more hp? Spend the money and the time on a turbocharger or just get a different car. Seriously.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
753 Posts
Agreed. Not worth it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
I thought the only difference between a 2.0 and 2.3 engine is the stroke, so that would mean you'd have to change the crankshaft. You probably have to change other stuff , but that is the main one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
108 Posts
[quote author=Jay32m link=topic=69270.msg1202620#msg1202620 date=1171306474]
i agree just add an intake and you are just as equal to a 2.3
[/quote]

Not quite. Adding an intake alone may not even add the magic 10hp that everyone believes it does. The engine isn't going to suddenly say, "Sweet, air! I've got enough extra air to dump 10hp worth of extra fuel into the combustion chamber!" Even adding VVT to the 2.0 in the 2006 models (which is much more effective overall than an intake) didn't close the gap enough.

The more important difference between the two motors is the torque difference, and I don't care what kind of intake and exhaust combo you put on a 2.0; there's no way it's going to equal the overall volumetric efficiency of the 2.3 motor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
Now now, I never said 2.0 + intake = 2.3, I just said for the amount of time, money, and effort that goes into an engine swap, the gain isn't worth it. For an engine swap, you may as well shoot for the turbo 2.3L, or a different engine all together. If not, then a turbo kit may be the way to go for your $5000.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
108 Posts
Right, you didn't say that, but Jay32m did... which is why I quoted him and not you. What you said I agree with.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
213 Posts
I dont think he said engin swap, or even implied that he wanted to do an engine swap. He wants to build up his 2.0 to 2.3. So stroker is the way to go. crankshaft and mabey some head work, not sure on the latter. You would more than likely also need a standalone ecu, or something as the stock ecu would shit bricks im sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
[quote author=Snipe[LAN] link=topic=69270.msg1207124#msg1207124 date=1171471585]
Right, you didn't say that, but Jay32m did... which is why I quoted him and not you. What you said I agree with.
[/quote]


Wanna fight about it? :lol:

Just joking. I know what you meant.

By the way, I covet your Toyota. Do you subscribe to GRM?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
108 Posts
[quote author=MUSpud2 link=topic=69270.msg1207166#msg1207166 date=1171472720]
[quote author=Snipe[LAN] link=topic=69270.msg1207124#msg1207124 date=1171471585]
Right, you didn't say that, but Jay32m did... which is why I quoted him and not you. What you said I agree with.
[/quote]


Wanna fight about it? :lol:

Just joking. I know what you meant.

By the way, I covet your Toyota. Do you subscribe to GRM?
[/quote]

No, I've never checked out GRM ... The pictured MR2 belongs to the shop I take my cars to. I've known and worked with the owner for years. That pic is from a race day at Spring Mountain Motorsports Park.

Velo3GT ... If his model doesn't have VVT, he'll definitely need to swap more parts. If anyone goes through the trouble of a standalone ECU on the NA 3, I'm going to have to ask what caused them to overlook turbocharging. The amount of work and $$$ a conversion would require is not worth it. Tuning and building a fuel map from scratch for a stock NA 3 isn't worth it either.

For close to $900.00 + shipping you can get a used 2.3 motor with everything you need but the computer/harness. For $4,000.00 + shipping you can make your 2.0 outperform the 2.3 by a long shot. We all know how vague car manufacturers can be when we try to find out information like "what are all the differences between the MZR20 and MZR23?" It's better to work with a known 2.3 that has everything.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,388 Posts
the 2.0 does have vvt.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
108 Posts
Not until 2006 I believe, unless the models in Australia/Europe etc had it the whole time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,388 Posts
yeah you're correct...2006 and up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,074 Posts
well i was just going off my experience with the 2 bc with an intake i was side by side with a 2.3 where as i didnt quite before (kid at school had a 2.3 sedan and we wanted to see how much faster his 2.3 was to my 2.0 and raced b4 and after intake....pulled on me by a little but much then after intake we stayed pretty much even)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,654 Posts
[quote author=Jay32m link=topic=69270.msg1209420#msg1209420 date=1171557123]
well i was just going off my experience with the 2 bc with an intake i was side by side with a 2.3 where as i didnt quite before (kid at school had a 2.3 sedan and we wanted to see how much faster his 2.3 was to my 2.0 and raced b4 and after intake....pulled on me by a little but much then after intake we stayed pretty much even)
[/quote]

Not exactly a scientific controlled test now was it?
 
1 - 20 of 47 Posts
Top