Building to 400hp on the 2.3 — am I missing anything

[baseline mac]

Putting together a build that should get me to around 400hp with a proper tune. Wanted to run it by people who actually know this platform before I pull the trigger on everything.

Current parts list:
∙ Corsa exhaust
∙ S&B cold air intake
∙ Turbosmart BOV
∙ CVF intercooler, charge pipes, and downpipe

Tuning side:
∙ Forscan for datalogs
∙ ProCal for flashing

Already planning on colder plugs and a few small things, but wanted a gut check from people who’ve been here before I finalize everything.

Anything glaring I’m missing?
Tuner recommendations for the 2.3 specifically would also be appreciated — not just a generic EcoBoost guy, someone with real revision logs on this exact platform.

Running 93 only, not trying to cut corners on fuel. Just want to make sure the build is complete before I start throwing money at a tune.

Pandaworks seems to be the move. Just want some clarity.

Sponsored

 

[Brian_B]

ProCal won’t get you there with any number of bolt ons - you need an aftermarket tune. No need for the ProCal module at all really

 

[Ducati1098]

Yeah you can pretty much throw the procal in the garbage, unless you want to use it for watching PIDs.

A custom 93 tune plus all the other supporting bolt-ons you have listed will get you close to ~300rwhp

Lots of good 2.3 tuning info in here:
https://www.bronco6g.com/forum/thre...bronco-performance-modification-build.128121/

 

[Malicar]

Procal nets little to none. Custom tune will be your only option.

Bov doesn't do anything for power

Also Highly unlikely to get 400whp on 93 without blowing it up. Potentially on E85 if the injectors can flow enough.

Built turbo will likely be necessary.

 

[Valhalla]

You will pop that motor.

 

[MWILD]

Putting together a build that should get me to around 400hp with a proper tune. Wanted to run it by people who actually know this platform before I pull the trigger on everything.

Current parts list:
∙ Corsa exhaust
∙ S&B cold air intake
∙ Turbosmart BOV
∙ CVF intercooler, charge pipes, and downpipe

Tuning side:
∙ Forscan for datalogs
∙ ProCal for flashing

Already planning on colder plugs and a few small things, but wanted a gut check from people who’ve been here before I finalize everything.

Anything glaring I’m missing?
Tuner recommendations for the 2.3 specifically would also be appreciated — not just a generic EcoBoost guy, someone with real revision logs on this exact platform.

Running 93 only, not trying to cut corners on fuel. Just want to make sure the build is complete before I start throwing money at a tune.

Pandaworks seems to be the move. Just want some clarity.

This is my Bronco in the link that @Ducati1098 mentioned.

Letting Gemini take the wheel here for a moment, I'm pretty close to your target, though using an E30 mix, not just 93 octane. Is it possible with just 93? Might be, but not with the OEM turbo.

Using a 15% to 16% loss factor—which is a solid middle ground for a manual-transmission 2.3L turning oversized tires—your crank numbers are:

• Horsepower: $\approx$ 388 – 392 hp
• Torque: $\approx$ 493 – 498 lb-ft

Panda Motorworks just dyno'd their Bronco with similar results, but I don't know what gear the used and the tire size and weight. Also, their dyno correction factor is in STD, not SAE - so the below is just a best guess with the info I have.

STD (Standard) correction uses a reference air temperature of 60°F, whereas the SAE correction on your previous sheet uses 77°F. Because cooler air is denser and makes more power, STD numbers are typically 3% to 4% higher than SAE numbers for the exact same run.

Panda Motorworks 93 Octane (STD)

• Wheel HP: 305.21
• Wheel Torque: 365.31 lb-ft

EMS 93 Octane (SAE)

• Wheel HP: 288.66
• Wheel Torque: 380.31 lb-ft

The Comparison (Apples-to-Apples)
If we "convert" your 93 octane SAE numbers to STD (multiplying by roughly 1.04) to match Panda's formatting:

• EMS Estimated 93 (STD) HP: $\approx$ 300 hp
• EMS Estimated 93 (STD) Torque: $\approx$ 395 lb-ft

Not trying to crap on anyone here, as I've heard great things about Panda Motorworks. IMO, you can't go wrong with them and the following: EMS, ZFG Racing, MPT, Tune Plus, Shoemaker, Goose and more.

 

[BlueWaffle]

Motor would be fine with a solid tune, your gonna need a fancy turbo though.

 

[Brian_B]

If you have the 7MT may need to look at clutch upgrade too - can't recall what the torque spec was on OEM clutch but seem to remember it capped around 415 ftlbs or something at the crank, and it doesn't take too much over stock to be able to hit that and start eating clutches.

If you have the 10AT, should be ok though. Just lamer.

 

[Valhalla]

 

[RadDad]

Sounds like a Mustang might be a better Ford horsey vehicle if you're looking for high horsepower numbers.

 

[Valhalla]

Or just spend the money as others have done and drop in the v8.

 

[baseline mac]

This is my Bronco in the link that @Ducati1098 mentioned.

Letting Gemini take the wheel here for a moment, I'm pretty close to your target, though using an E30 mix, not just 93 octane. Is it possible with just 93? Might be, but not with the OEM turbo.

Using a 15% to 16% loss factor—which is a solid middle ground for a manual-transmission 2.3L turning oversized tires—your crank numbers are:

• Horsepower: $\approx$ 388 – 392 hp
• Torque: $\approx$ 493 – 498 lb-ft

Panda Motorworks just dyno'd their Bronco with similar results, but I don't know what gear the used and the tire size and weight. Also, their dyno correction factor is in STD, not SAE - so the below is just a best guess with the info I have.

STD (Standard) correction uses a reference air temperature of 60°F, whereas the SAE correction on your previous sheet uses 77°F. Because cooler air is denser and makes more power, STD numbers are typically 3% to 4% higher than SAE numbers for the exact same run.

Panda Motorworks 93 Octane (STD)

• Wheel HP: 305.21
• Wheel Torque: 365.31 lb-ft

EMS 93 Octane (SAE)

• Wheel HP: 288.66
• Wheel Torque: 380.31 lb-ft

The Comparison (Apples-to-Apples)
If we "convert" your 93 octane SAE numbers to STD (multiplying by roughly 1.04) to match Panda's formatting:

• EMS Estimated 93 (STD) HP: $\approx$ 300 hp
• EMS Estimated 93 (STD) Torque: $\approx$ 395 lb-ft

Not trying to crap on anyone here, as I've heard great things about Panda Motorworks. IMO, you can't go wrong with them and the following: EMS, ZFG Racing, MPT, Tune Plus, Shoemaker, Goose and more.

Solid response. Thank you.

 

[MC1313]

I will let you know in advance that the Turbo Smart BOV does not fit in the CVFAb charge pipe. They have incorrect milling specs and are off by 1.1 mm and it won’t seal. The reason the OE BOV works is because they are a plunger type and when installed it holds the plunger partially open. I had to get with the guys at AFE to make a special “charge pipe” milled to correct specs to accept the Turbo Smart BOV. All the charge pipes for 2.3 have incorrect specs. I would call CV Fab and see if they have corrected this issue before ordering because they will not exchange the pipe once you get it.

 

[baseline mac]

Good call!!

 

[23OBX2.7]

Coming from loving an HPP Mustang convertible ......IMO unless 4 cyl turbo builds is a die hard hobby and have $20K+ to blow ......maybe better to do a 2.7 easy build.

Last I looked at high grade 2.0/2.3 it was min $12K for long block plus everything else

Why not 2.7 with Garett tunrbos upgrade, exhaust, OC and tune? should easily get 550 lb ft and 400+ hp, reliably....and butter smooth power delivery.

Sponsored