duratec 2.0 or 2.3 ?

[dan00001]

hi wich engine will have the best acceleration and driveability? a duratec 2.0L or a duratec 2.3L both doing about 220 bhp? also wich will rev higher? thanks, dan.

[casbar]

Most seem to be going for the 2.3 now. I have just priced up a conversion from a K to a 2.3 Duratec, and its around 13k.

[dan00001]

when you buy a new caterham 7 will they make it to fit a dutatec engine? on the cosworth website the 2.3 duratec engines with 220 bhp are priced at abot $10000 wich is about £5000.

[casbar]

£5000 for the engine, the engine build to 260 bhp was around 9k all in. Then you need a gearbox, installation kit etc. Thats all before you buy the donner car or the new build.

[dan00001]

yer im buying the caterham starter kit on my 18th birthday(thats when i get my £5000 inheritants)and plan to take about 3 years to build it by wich time ill be able to afford the insurance.

[fergus]

casbar said:

Thats all before you buy the donner car ...

I thought you were buying a car, not a kebab?

I think you can get into a std 2.3 duratec considerably cheaper than £5k sir....

[casbar]

Yum Yum

[dan00001]

ye but £5k is for a 220bhp 2.3 duratec put together by cosworth. is cosworth the best tuning company or is there others i should take a look at? thanks,dan.

[casbar]

www.raceco.com - 01394 383499 this chap builds some of the best Duratecs around, quite a lot of the aftermarket Caterham conversions, have his engines. He's the guy I would use. You could also try www.raceline.co.uk, who are also building Duratecs. But have a word with Ammo at raceco first, then make your own mind up

[oppressed mass]

Bit late I know but if it helps; -
The 2.0 and 2.3 are the same generic architecture. In order to acheive the extra capacity the 2.3 block has a slightly higher deck height and therefore a longer stroke (is undersquare). That means that the 2.3 engine will have better torque but will be less throttle responsive than the 2.0 which is oversquare (i.e bore is wider than stroke is long). In standard use both engines rated at about 145 hp.

Duratec nerd

[sfaulds]

Dan,

I'm not sure where you've got £5000 from - the Cosworth site states £6,691.63 (+VAT presumably) for a 220bhp 2.3l. On top of that you'll need to budget another £1k or so for an ECU and loom, another £1k for a decent exhaust, a few hundred for flywheel and clutch and between £400 and £900 for a sump. By the time you've got the thing on engine mounts and mated to a gearbox you're going to be looking at well in excess of double your estimate. If anyone can fit a Duratec to a Caterham for much less than £10k I'd be astonished.

Cheers

Stuart

[rubystone]

sfaulds said:

Dan,

I'm not sure where you've got £5000 from - the Cosworth site states £6,691.63 (+VAT presumably) for a 220bhp 2.3l. On top of that you'll need to budget another £1k or so for an ECU and loom, another £1k for a decent exhaust, a few hundred for flywheel and clutch and between £400 and £900 for a sump. By the time you've got the thing on engine mounts and mated to a gearbox you're going to be looking at well in excess of double your estimate. If anyone can fit a Duratec to a Caterham for much less than £10k I'd be astonished.

Cheers

Stuart

Some claim to - and then when they can't deliver on their promises, they ask Ammo to help out....

[dan00001]

thanks for all your advice

[dannylt]

To say the 2.3 will be less "throttle responsive" (whatever that means) than the 2.0 based purely on under/over squareness is rather simplistic. Once they are tuned and have skinny flywheels the difference is negligible, and a world apart from standard. The 2.3 has more torque and power with less tuning, so I don't see why anyone would go for the 2.0 given a choice. By your argument the undersquare R500 engine is not revvy...

dan00001, if you have several years to do it why not build the engine yourself? Or pick a tuned second hand one up off ebay.

[jackal]

sfaulds said:

Dan,

I'm not sure where you've got £5000 from - the Cosworth site states £6,691.63 (+VAT presumably) for a 220bhp 2.3l. On top of that you'll need to budget another £1k or so for an ECU and loom, another £1k for a decent exhaust, a few hundred for flywheel and clutch and between £400 and £900 for a sump. By the time you've got the thing on engine mounts and mated to a gearbox you're going to be looking at well in excess of double your estimate. If anyone can fit a Duratec to a Caterham for much less than £10k I'd be astonished.

Cheers

Stuart

BFO DING ... 10k minimum !

also 500 quid for mapping down at Greenalds, brucey to cut a hole in your sideskin, Duratec R decals etc...
last time i priced up my car the engine bit of it came to around 12k fully built

[sfaulds]

Sold yours yet Rich?

[jackal]

lol

[dannylt]

Driving it then... or just looking at it?

[barrythompson]

[quote=dannylt]To say the 2.3 will be less "throttle responsive" (whatever that means) than the 2.0 based purely on under/over squareness is rather simplistic. Once they are tuned and have skinny flywheels the difference is negligible, and a world apart from standard. The 2.3 has more torque and power with less tuning, so I don't see why anyone would go for the 2.0 given a choice. By your argument the undersquare R500 engine is not revvy...

Hey Danny, i went for the 2.0l and it is still running....

I agree with more torque though, but this will have to wait.

Hows yours doing, cant get over my first 'gravel' experience with you!

Cheers

Barry

[dannylt]

That was a silly experimental 2.5, not a nice tame 2.3

Being rebuilt somewhat differently and with airbox to be a lot quieter for more track day choice, ready for next year...