[antics]

Nothing wrong with having 2 dipsticks and the one on the 2.5 is better designed. No more weird oil readings.

Pretty sure that the valve covers are perfectly interchangeable though if you still want to go that route.

 

[ifixthings]

Swapping a 2011 Fusion 2.5 into my 2005 3S HB 2.3 in a week or two and am looking for some clarification on use of the above adapter kit and a couple of other things.

1) Does the ifixthings adapter kit allow you to keep the 2.5 Fusion intake and use the 2.3 TB? Or, Is the reference there to the Mazda 2.5 intake manifold and not the Ford?

That is what I'd like to do, keep the Fusion intake and use the 2.3 TB. Makes more sense to keep the Fusion intake that mates up better with the head. I don't really want to have to get a Mazda 2.5 intake or a MS3/CX7 TB right now.

2) When using the TB adapter kit, Will the stock intake tubing still fit? I'm not running a CAI and really don't want to.

3) Though I've read every page of both swap threads I just wanted to clarify, For the above swap '11 Fusion 2.5 into '05 3S, you use the Fusion valve cover? I'm pretty sure the answer is yes but just checking.

Correct, my kit allows you to use the 2.5 intake manifold with your 2.3 throttle body. And with retaining your original throttle body, all original intake tubing, etc will all fit.

You can use either valve cover.

Okay, reading more, it looks like since I'm swapping the oil pan I'll still have the same dipstick. If I use the Fusion valve cover, I'll have two dipsticks. So, gonna stick with the 2.3 valve cover.

There aren't any concerns over oil passages or coil fitment with the 2.3 valve cover on the 2.5 engine. Right?

Sorry, have read so much lately it's all kind of a jumble.

Thanks.

From an external perspective, you wont notice a difference between 2.3 and 2.5. If you use the 2.3 valve cover then your plug wires/coil packs will all fit the same way as original.

 

[DanHas3]

Excellent. Thanks for the info. Picking up the engine tomorrow.

 

[DanHas3]

I took the engine and trans out together, Anyone else done it that way?

When I disconnected the exhaust from the head, the oil came seeping out, enough to drip and run all the way down the side of the block. A preliminary view of the post cat O2 performance indicated that the cat is struggling. No wonder with all of that oil being pumped into it. Ugh. Maybe after a few thousand miles of running dry it will fix itself up. We'll see.

Now it's time to start swapping things over.

 

[antics]

I think everyone takes the engine and transmission out together. I did both like that. I've always hated trying to line up an input shaft on a FWD with the engine in place.

That's some pretty extreme oil issues if it's running straight liquid into your exhaust manifold. You should probably go ahead and replace that exhaust manifold while the engine is out, at least check it. Unless you go with an expensive aftermarket header the exhaust mani is much harder to replace with the engine in the car. Headers are usually two piece and are easy to install, the factory manifold is a long one piece unit and requires you to take a lot of crap out of the way to get it in. I was concerned about what mine looked like when I did my engine so I rented one of those inspection cameras and fed it down the exhaust manifold so that I could see the cat. Thankfully it was still clean white and I could make out the grid pattern. You should maybe do the same. It'll be a lot easier to do the manifold swap now than to have to do it later if you need to.

 

[DanHas3]

It was a pretty tight fit coming out so I began to wonder if it was the best way. Glad to hear that I wasn't the only one. lol

Yeah, the thing was drinking a quart or more every 400 or so miles.

Before the swap I monitored O2's and the post cat was showing the classic cat problem where even after warming up the post-cat followed the pre-cat. Granted that's not a 100% confirmation but pretty concerning. I just priced standard aftermarket replacement manifolds and was very relieved to see that they only run around $250.

Yeah, I couldn't imagine swapping that out with the engine in place. So, gonna order a new one and get it done when it's easiest to do. One less thing to worry about down the road. Thanks.

 

[DanHas3]

Is it cool to use the Mazda torque specs for everything like, timing cover, oil pan, valve cover, crank bolt, and rear main seal? Or, is it best to use Ford specs?

I only saw one reference to this in the other 2.5 swap thread and didn't get anything clear. I have the Mazda FSM but nothing for the Ford.

Thanks for your patience with all of my questions.

 

[antics]

I used all the torque specs from my Mazda 3 haynes manual. I can't think of anything that would be different enough between the two engines that would give a different torque spec.

 

[DanHas3]

Thanks again!

 

[DanHas3]

Looks like I've got a pretty big problem on my hands. Maybe someone has seen this. I've attached four photos.

The problem is that the 2.5 head has an open port for the OCV. It is however blocked by the 2.5 timing cover. The 2.3 timing cover does not block the port which to me means that no OCV pressure will build.

Pic 1: OCV port in 2.5 head.
Pic 2: 2.5 timing cover showing area of cover that blocks open port.
Pic 3: 2.3 timing cover showing area of cover that is open and will not block port.
Pic 4: Side by side comparison of covers.

Any ideas as to what I might need to do? Yeah, I realize that the port has to be blocked but is putting a plug in it of some kind the only or best way?

2005 3S and a 2011 Fusion 2.5.

Thanks!

 

[DanHas3]

Oh hell, it just occurred to me that I was looking at that port in the head with the OCV removed. Now that I think about it, the OCV itself may actually seal off that port. Gonna have to look closer tomorrow.

 

[ifixthings]

You'll put some rtv over that area, since the cover does meet it there. Bolt the timing cover down tight. Noone has had any issues leaving it blocked by the timing cover. Alternatively, you can always do a quick tap and put a small plug in there if it really bothers you.

 

[antics]

The 2.5 routes the oil through the block. The 2.3 routed it through that passage on your valve cover. The passage on the 2.3 valve cover will not be used. This is covered in these threads but they get so huge that details like this get looked over. It's not a problem at all. If there was no ocv pressure there would be some kind of CEL because the ECU would be trying to modulate the timing but it would read no change at the CMPS. I've got 23k miles on my swap and never had any codes.

 

[DanHas3]

This is covered in these threads but they get so huge that details like this get looked over.

You're right, lots of info and sometimes confusing. I read through about 30 pages in the other thread last night! Actually, I knew that the oil was routed through the block. That's why I was surprised to see a port that was open to the timing cover. Now, although that port will largely be blocked by the OCV it's still somewhat of an open passage for some pressure loss with the 2.3 cover. Maybe I'm worrying too much about it especially if nobody else is having any problems.

Noone has had any issues leaving it blocked by the timing cover.

That's the problem I was worried about though. The port is not blocked by the 2.3 cover but is by the 2.5 cover. I'm not a big fan of tapping and plugging but I'm definitely gonna have to think about it.

Thanks guys!

 

[madmatt2024]

I remember there was somebody that had issues with this and they taped and put a plug in the passage on the head.

 

[DanHas3]

I remember there was somebody that had issues with this and they taped and put a plug in the passage on the head.

I remember reading about somebody putting a plug in an oil passage or somewhere else in my reading. I'm so brain dead from this swap right now I'd go nuts if I had to go back and read through those 117 pages again. lol

Antics said that he used the 2.3 cover and has not had any problems. I feel like the OCV most likely blocks it well enough that it doesn't cause any problems.

Will look closer tomorrow.

 

[antics]

You'd have to verify that it even has oil flowing through it. On the 2.5 engine it's blocked off by the timing cover so there would be no reason for it to have oil flowing through it. I also doubt Ford would engineer it that way if it was meant to seal oil pressure, the flat face of the timing cover with some RTV on it I mean. They would have plugged it or taken it out of the casting entirely.

 

[madmatt2024]

You'd have to verify that it even has oil flowing through it. On the 2.5 engine it's blocked off by the timing cover so there would be no reason for it to have oil flowing through it. I also doubt Ford would engineer it that way if it was meant to seal oil pressure, the flat face of the timing cover with some RTV on it I mean. They would have plugged it or taken it out of the casting entirely.

As a mechanic, you clearly underestimate the stupidity of auto manufacturers. My old 97' Escort had a motor variant (CVH) that had been in production since the early 80's. Back then there was a coolant channel in the head that allowed coolant to flow through a channel in the intake. Step forward to 97', that channel is still there in the head even though its a completely different casting that the old intake won't even fit on. The only thing sealing that channel off is a blank spot on the intake manifold with a gasket in between. So, if you remove the intake you will loose coolant. The designed continued untill the Escort ended production in 02'. Don't think Ford won't do the same thing again.

 

[DanHas3]

Well, the 2.5 is about 98% buttoned up and ready to go. Some minor concerns before moving forward.

The 2.5 valve covers have that lousy CHT sensor and the cap covering it that leaks and allows water into the spark plug area. The two plugs are badly corroded/gunked up and the area is kind of a mess. I've left the valve cover off as I'm still dealing with the mess and the plugs. I don't want to remove them cold so I've just cracked them and am soaking with penetrant and some choke/carb cleaner. I'll snug them up and then remove them soon when the engine is warm.

I mistakenly put the rear main seal on after I put the oil pan on. Dumb move, I know. Anyway, I got it on and there is a small 10mm area around the seal/pan interface where the ultra gray didn't squish out. I know I've covered the area well but for some reason no squish out in that spot. So, I'm debating on removing the seal and doing it again. On the other hand I'm debating not doing it because I don't know if the seal will get screwed up. Kind of up in the air right now but must decide before I put the flywheel on.

 

[madmatt2024]

I've left the valve cover off as I'm still dealing with the mess and the plugs. I don't want to remove them cold so I've just cracked them and am soaking with penetrant and some choke/carb cleaner. I'll snug them up and then remove them soon when the engine is warm.

Bad idea. You NEVER remove spark plugs from an aluminum head when its warm/hot. Always do it cold or you risk damaging the threads. The taper or washer that seals the plug to the head is after the threads so there is almost no chance that the water and corrosion got in them.