Welcome Visitor! Please take a few seconds and 
bhgl
Active Member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2024
- Messages
- 225
- Reaction score
- 182
- Points
- 43
- Location
- Northern Ontario, Canada
- Vehicle Year
- 2003
- Make / Model
- Mazda B3000
- Engine Type
- 3.0 V6
- Transmission
- Automatic
- 2WD / 4WD
- 2WD
Preface:
The feasibility of an engine swap is in my opinion the single biggest factor as to what makes it a "good" candidate. Plenty of folks on the forum here, and elsewhere have swapped in 5.0s from Explorers v8s, Volkswagen TDI engines, among the notables, and those do make some of the best candidates based strictly on a compatibility, and availability of information. The Skyactiv-G is not one of those swaps.
This engine has, to the best of my knowledge and research, basically never been swapped into anything since it's release in 2013. There are no kits, few aftermarket parts, no standalone ECUs, or even manifolds for longitudinal applications. The dream of swapping this thing into anything, let alone a 4WD/RWD truck from the first decade of the 2000s is lofty, if not, improbable short of two separate stakes in a fabrication and a software engineering firm.
However, I think there's an argument to be made for it being one of, if not the best single engine swap to meet OEM needs of the 3.0, and potentially even the 4.0. It could in fact be, the motor that keeps this truck rolling now that new parts for the V6s are slowly disappearing from parts store shelves. With the obvious exception of course being, no one has any idea how to do it, if it can be done relatively simply, and be done reliably.
I've had two vehicles now equipped with Mazda's 2.5L Skyactiv-G engine, I really loved them, one a 2014 Mazda 3 Manual, which I unfortunately didn't get to put too many miles on before I moved back to the big city for University, and a 2017 Mazda 6 which drove my family around Northern Ontario, delivered thousands of pizzas, and all around was a dead reliable, sporty, and well sorted car. I loved everything about both of these cars from handling to fuel economy, and comfort. They really felt like they were designed by people who care about the act of driving first.
Though I never owned one, driving a 2022 Mazda 3 Turbo (PY-VPTS) with AWD was even more fun, the car isn't a sports car, but somehow with it's low-end torque and excellent sedate handling, feels unlike anything else I've ever driven. It doesn't knock your socks off, but every time you get in it, whether a long distance drive, a backroad blast, or an errand run, you discover something that only people in tune with real world driving will appreciate.
All that being said, here's my argument as to why I believe this engine could be the best swap for long-term mile munching driver like myself.
Reliability:
Short of a recall due to spiders in the engine causing fires, and another one in 2019 relating to the cylinder deactivation modules, it's been a rock solid, efficient little motor, allowing Mazda to reach, and on some vehicles surpass Toyota levels of reliability. Mazda even beat out Toyota for overall reliability in 2020 according to Consumer reports.
Mazda took Toyota's iterative production and design process to heart, and implemented minor changes to parts over years of production at a highly rated factory in Japan, with some North American Mazda 3s being produced in Salamanca Mexico, another highly rated facility. These engines have just a little over 10 years of driving on them now, to which folks have attested to rock solid reliability on these engines beyond 200K Miles. Anecdotal reports are stating little to no issues up to 450K Miles in some of the earlier 2014-2015 models.
With a standard compression ratio of 13:1 (actually 14:1 outside of North America), Mazda put quality internals in these engines including a forged steel crankshaft, forged connecting rods, and aluminum pistons.
It stands to reason, this is now a proven motor.
Ubiquity:
From 2013 up until today this engine has been put in just about everything Mazda made, from the compact Mazda 3, to the full size CX-9.
Parts are just about everywhere too, and cars with the 2.5 installed are now making their way to pick n' pulls and junkyards.
Full engines with very low miles can be had starting at just under 1500$CAD, at least for now, and in Canada.
While not yet in North America, the 2.5 has found itself being implemented longitudinally in the new CX-60, alongside an optional PHEV setup. If it does make it's way to North America, or some of the parts do, it may be significantly easier to implement this engine for Ranger based applications.
Performance, and efficiency:
Now this is where I think this engine really shines for application in the 3rd gen Ranger.
Stock, the motor is rated for an even 186 HP and Torque at the crank respectively, with later models getting up to 196 HP, with torque numbers staying the same. It's equipped with variable valve timing, and a high pressure direct injection system, and like most every modern engine, it's drive-by-wire.
Overall it's still an economy motor, just made very well. Its lacking a specific performance focus, however it always had some of Mazda's sporting spirit and is super responsive even when paired to an automatic. It revs up to a limit of 6500 RPM, and likes to hang out between 3000-4000 rpm, with peak horsepower happening closer to the red line, and peak torque between 3250-4000 RPM.
This is surprisingly close to where peak torque comes on for the 3.0 Vulcan V6, given lightweight internals, as well as slightly better horsepower and torque numbers, this engine in the same exact application would easily outpace a 3.0 V6 in the same application, and as you can see below, it challenges the 4.0 OHV (not the later SOHC 4.0).
(2018 Mazda 3, Auto)
(4.0 OHV Ranger at rear wheels, indeterminate transmission, approx. 1998-2000 model, this isn't perfect data, but useful for reference)
The engine is an all aluminum affair, making it significantly lighter than the iron V6s, and even the 2.3 Duratec, which the 2.5 shares some roots dating back to the Mazda/Ford days.
It also sips fuel on the highway, in the Full size CX9 with AWD, it can hit 26 MPG according to the EPA, with automatic Mazda 3s with FWD hitting 35 MPG, again according to EPA estimates. Other folks have been able to attain higher ratings in their day to day. My Mazda 6 averaged an astounding 7.5L/100 KM over the 70 000+ KMs I owned it, that included everything from drive-thrus and pizza delivery, all the way to long distance road trips.
Going Faster:
In 2016, Mazda added a turbo so that their redesigned full size CX-9 could actually get out of its own way. The PY-VPTS, wasn't really designed to be a performance unit either, it was however designed for low-end torque and solid efficiency. Since then they've slapped this thing into the midsize Mazda 6, and crammed it into the Mazda 3 alongside an AWD system.
With regular fuel, we're looking at 227 HP @ 5000 RPM, but more exciting to me, 310 LB-FT @ 2000 RPM. With premium fuel things jump up to 250 HP, and 320 LB-FT, again available at low RPM.
This engine is even more complex, it can vary exhaust pressures at different RPMs to keep the turbo spinning, even at the low end of the RPM spectrum. It also has a cooled exhaust gas recirculation system, reducing temperatures within the turbo itself. It also has a 4-23-1 exhaust manifold setup, meaning the two center cylinders effectively have a combined exhaust port, Mazda says this helps efficiency by pulling exhaust gases from adjacent ports with each ignition cycle.
Installed with a standard tune, this engine would easily outpace anything that ever came in a 3rd gen ranger from stuck, and put up a valiant fight against the 4th generation ranger's 2.3 Ecoboost.
When it comes to performance parts, selection is pretty limited, but companies like Corksport, and a few others do offer SOME parts. For the engine, it's mostly intake and exhaust systems, but also some options for tuning. Thankfully some folks do work on these engines computers. According to this gentleman's video, with just a tune and a Corksport exhaust, he was able to pull an additional 20-30 HP and Torque to the wheels through the car's auto and AWD system over OEM.
Where it all falls apart:
The complexity of the Skyactiv-G, as well as modern Mazda's love of interconnecting vehicle systems is where the doubt comes in. This engine is basically half computer, like most modern fuel injected cars are anyways. Getting it to play nice with any of the Ranger's existing systems wouldn't be so hard, if only there was a standalone ECU that was certified to work with the PY-VBT motor. Without digging into it hands on, there's no telling exactly what inputs, no matter how unrelated you may think they are, that the ECU will need in order to make this engine run well, or at all.
Then there's the tranverseness of it all, with only a very very recent overseas exception, this engine has never been mounted to anything longitudinally. Driven accessories will be a total crapshoot, things like the power steering are driven by an electric pump on typical Mazdas, all well and good there, but you might run into computer trouble once some of the accessories' modules start being deleted.
Not to mention the exhaust manifold which looks like this:
This engine in NA and Turbo applications really depends on data pulled from the exhaust, as well it's EGR system to be efficient, now most of us are fine deleting EGR systems, but with its high compression ratio, this engine DEPENDS on EGR to be efficient and not detonate. This could be fixed with a tune, but all the same, you'll need custom headers.
Now with enough dollars and dimes, you can mount pretty much any engine to any transmission, transverse origins or otherwise, but in this case there WILL have to be custom manufacture adapters, and maybe even a bellhousing to get it mounted up to something like an M5OD.
Conclusion:
All in all, I love this motor, I wrote all this just for fun and to put my thoughts in writing. Maybe I'll be able to one day put a real Mazda heart in my "Mazda" truck. I do think this motor would actually work very well in a Ranger, if implemented well.
That's the challenge.
If you guys have any thoughts, or want to share other engines that you think might beat out the Skyactiv-G for the title of "Most reasonable motor in a 3rd Gen Ford Ranger" feel free to share!
The feasibility of an engine swap is in my opinion the single biggest factor as to what makes it a "good" candidate. Plenty of folks on the forum here, and elsewhere have swapped in 5.0s from Explorers v8s, Volkswagen TDI engines, among the notables, and those do make some of the best candidates based strictly on a compatibility, and availability of information. The Skyactiv-G is not one of those swaps.
This engine has, to the best of my knowledge and research, basically never been swapped into anything since it's release in 2013. There are no kits, few aftermarket parts, no standalone ECUs, or even manifolds for longitudinal applications. The dream of swapping this thing into anything, let alone a 4WD/RWD truck from the first decade of the 2000s is lofty, if not, improbable short of two separate stakes in a fabrication and a software engineering firm.
However, I think there's an argument to be made for it being one of, if not the best single engine swap to meet OEM needs of the 3.0, and potentially even the 4.0. It could in fact be, the motor that keeps this truck rolling now that new parts for the V6s are slowly disappearing from parts store shelves. With the obvious exception of course being, no one has any idea how to do it, if it can be done relatively simply, and be done reliably.
I've had two vehicles now equipped with Mazda's 2.5L Skyactiv-G engine, I really loved them, one a 2014 Mazda 3 Manual, which I unfortunately didn't get to put too many miles on before I moved back to the big city for University, and a 2017 Mazda 6 which drove my family around Northern Ontario, delivered thousands of pizzas, and all around was a dead reliable, sporty, and well sorted car. I loved everything about both of these cars from handling to fuel economy, and comfort. They really felt like they were designed by people who care about the act of driving first.
Though I never owned one, driving a 2022 Mazda 3 Turbo (PY-VPTS) with AWD was even more fun, the car isn't a sports car, but somehow with it's low-end torque and excellent sedate handling, feels unlike anything else I've ever driven. It doesn't knock your socks off, but every time you get in it, whether a long distance drive, a backroad blast, or an errand run, you discover something that only people in tune with real world driving will appreciate.
All that being said, here's my argument as to why I believe this engine could be the best swap for long-term mile munching driver like myself.
Reliability:
Short of a recall due to spiders in the engine causing fires, and another one in 2019 relating to the cylinder deactivation modules, it's been a rock solid, efficient little motor, allowing Mazda to reach, and on some vehicles surpass Toyota levels of reliability. Mazda even beat out Toyota for overall reliability in 2020 according to Consumer reports.
Mazda took Toyota's iterative production and design process to heart, and implemented minor changes to parts over years of production at a highly rated factory in Japan, with some North American Mazda 3s being produced in Salamanca Mexico, another highly rated facility. These engines have just a little over 10 years of driving on them now, to which folks have attested to rock solid reliability on these engines beyond 200K Miles. Anecdotal reports are stating little to no issues up to 450K Miles in some of the earlier 2014-2015 models.
With a standard compression ratio of 13:1 (actually 14:1 outside of North America), Mazda put quality internals in these engines including a forged steel crankshaft, forged connecting rods, and aluminum pistons.
It stands to reason, this is now a proven motor.
Ubiquity:
From 2013 up until today this engine has been put in just about everything Mazda made, from the compact Mazda 3, to the full size CX-9.
Parts are just about everywhere too, and cars with the 2.5 installed are now making their way to pick n' pulls and junkyards.
Full engines with very low miles can be had starting at just under 1500$CAD, at least for now, and in Canada.
While not yet in North America, the 2.5 has found itself being implemented longitudinally in the new CX-60, alongside an optional PHEV setup. If it does make it's way to North America, or some of the parts do, it may be significantly easier to implement this engine for Ranger based applications.
Performance, and efficiency:
Now this is where I think this engine really shines for application in the 3rd gen Ranger.
Stock, the motor is rated for an even 186 HP and Torque at the crank respectively, with later models getting up to 196 HP, with torque numbers staying the same. It's equipped with variable valve timing, and a high pressure direct injection system, and like most every modern engine, it's drive-by-wire.
Overall it's still an economy motor, just made very well. Its lacking a specific performance focus, however it always had some of Mazda's sporting spirit and is super responsive even when paired to an automatic. It revs up to a limit of 6500 RPM, and likes to hang out between 3000-4000 rpm, with peak horsepower happening closer to the red line, and peak torque between 3250-4000 RPM.
This is surprisingly close to where peak torque comes on for the 3.0 Vulcan V6, given lightweight internals, as well as slightly better horsepower and torque numbers, this engine in the same exact application would easily outpace a 3.0 V6 in the same application, and as you can see below, it challenges the 4.0 OHV (not the later SOHC 4.0).
(2018 Mazda 3, Auto)
(4.0 OHV Ranger at rear wheels, indeterminate transmission, approx. 1998-2000 model, this isn't perfect data, but useful for reference)
The engine is an all aluminum affair, making it significantly lighter than the iron V6s, and even the 2.3 Duratec, which the 2.5 shares some roots dating back to the Mazda/Ford days.
It also sips fuel on the highway, in the Full size CX9 with AWD, it can hit 26 MPG according to the EPA, with automatic Mazda 3s with FWD hitting 35 MPG, again according to EPA estimates. Other folks have been able to attain higher ratings in their day to day. My Mazda 6 averaged an astounding 7.5L/100 KM over the 70 000+ KMs I owned it, that included everything from drive-thrus and pizza delivery, all the way to long distance road trips.
Going Faster:
In 2016, Mazda added a turbo so that their redesigned full size CX-9 could actually get out of its own way. The PY-VPTS, wasn't really designed to be a performance unit either, it was however designed for low-end torque and solid efficiency. Since then they've slapped this thing into the midsize Mazda 6, and crammed it into the Mazda 3 alongside an AWD system.
With regular fuel, we're looking at 227 HP @ 5000 RPM, but more exciting to me, 310 LB-FT @ 2000 RPM. With premium fuel things jump up to 250 HP, and 320 LB-FT, again available at low RPM.
This engine is even more complex, it can vary exhaust pressures at different RPMs to keep the turbo spinning, even at the low end of the RPM spectrum. It also has a cooled exhaust gas recirculation system, reducing temperatures within the turbo itself. It also has a 4-23-1 exhaust manifold setup, meaning the two center cylinders effectively have a combined exhaust port, Mazda says this helps efficiency by pulling exhaust gases from adjacent ports with each ignition cycle.
Installed with a standard tune, this engine would easily outpace anything that ever came in a 3rd gen ranger from stuck, and put up a valiant fight against the 4th generation ranger's 2.3 Ecoboost.
When it comes to performance parts, selection is pretty limited, but companies like Corksport, and a few others do offer SOME parts. For the engine, it's mostly intake and exhaust systems, but also some options for tuning. Thankfully some folks do work on these engines computers. According to this gentleman's video, with just a tune and a Corksport exhaust, he was able to pull an additional 20-30 HP and Torque to the wheels through the car's auto and AWD system over OEM.
Where it all falls apart:
The complexity of the Skyactiv-G, as well as modern Mazda's love of interconnecting vehicle systems is where the doubt comes in. This engine is basically half computer, like most modern fuel injected cars are anyways. Getting it to play nice with any of the Ranger's existing systems wouldn't be so hard, if only there was a standalone ECU that was certified to work with the PY-VBT motor. Without digging into it hands on, there's no telling exactly what inputs, no matter how unrelated you may think they are, that the ECU will need in order to make this engine run well, or at all.
Then there's the tranverseness of it all, with only a very very recent overseas exception, this engine has never been mounted to anything longitudinally. Driven accessories will be a total crapshoot, things like the power steering are driven by an electric pump on typical Mazdas, all well and good there, but you might run into computer trouble once some of the accessories' modules start being deleted.
Not to mention the exhaust manifold which looks like this:
This engine in NA and Turbo applications really depends on data pulled from the exhaust, as well it's EGR system to be efficient, now most of us are fine deleting EGR systems, but with its high compression ratio, this engine DEPENDS on EGR to be efficient and not detonate. This could be fixed with a tune, but all the same, you'll need custom headers.
Now with enough dollars and dimes, you can mount pretty much any engine to any transmission, transverse origins or otherwise, but in this case there WILL have to be custom manufacture adapters, and maybe even a bellhousing to get it mounted up to something like an M5OD.
Conclusion:
All in all, I love this motor, I wrote all this just for fun and to put my thoughts in writing. Maybe I'll be able to one day put a real Mazda heart in my "Mazda" truck. I do think this motor would actually work very well in a Ranger, if implemented well.
That's the challenge.
If you guys have any thoughts, or want to share other engines that you think might beat out the Skyactiv-G for the title of "Most reasonable motor in a 3rd Gen Ford Ranger" feel free to share!
