Not this time either sadly as the gaskets need doing.

 

2.2 CDBs are still available secondhand.
It will be interesting to see how Alan G gets on with his 2.5 litre. I think he said it was 525 bhp and something like 560 ft/lbs around 5,800rpm.

 

Do you have one to sell harvey, interested if so?

 

I don't believe Alan has any intention of running it at that level though in the interests of reliability. Making the power is the easy bit !

Andy

 

Maybe a hornets nest by mentioning this, but i had a conversation recently with John about stuff like reliability and how my car is used in comparison to his.
This came about with how little mileage i've done in mine (4000 almost) as against his 15000 and so, mine had not really been "thrashed" or had a “hard time” yet.

John's car, up until recently, was his "daily driver". As part of his job, he does tremendous mileage driving from here to there, but how often is "450/400" *really* used?

Not *that* often, i'll bet. Not in the day to day stuff of his job. Our congested roads just won't allow it and with these kind of performance levels, you'll never get away with it!
In my mind covering 15000/annum or more in a car with "450/400" tells you nothing about reliability at that power level. You can drive a 600bhp car for 15000 miles a year if you drive within the normal speed limits on our roads.

In my case, after it was mapped to run in, the car produced circa 410/410 and stayed that way for approximately 2000miles until Steve looked at it.

But here's the rub.. I don't use the car daily. I don't use it get to work, or do any significant mileage, other than when it gets taken out to events (none this year so far.. ) or for a "weekend adrenaline kick".

And that’s the thing. “adrenaline kick”. The car has it’s full potential used regularly when it’s out and about when I get the opportunity to drive it, so the mileage that’s on the car just now may be relatively low in comparison, but it’s not been treated with kid gloves.

A lot of people say to turn the power down if I want my car to remain reliable and I dare say, judging by previous failures, it’s possibly wise advice on the EJ257.
The problem is, the car isn’t used daily, it’s used mainly at weekends, where it would be pretty pointless going out for an “adrenaline kick”, with the boost turned down!
Why bother tuning it to that level in the first place!!
If the car was my only car, then yes, I can see me turning down the boost for the everyday stuff and turning it up when you want to “play”, but I can’t see me turning ti down for the use I’m putting it to.

Does that make any sense?

 

Alan,

makes perfect sense to me!

John - maybe next time at Knockhill then, I've yet to be in an Impreza with more than 400bhp.

John

 

My concern at the moment is not so much the engine, but the standard gearbox!

No flat shifts on this car... ooh no siree.

 

Too true!! Remains to be seen how it stays together!!

 

I agree in so many ways Alan.

Apart from when trying to save fuel recently because of queues at the pumps or if there is a mechanical issue or snow, it sees full boost every day, but not usually of the repeated sort.

What is difficult to work out is how stress vs time/miles compare. I've always thought that another say 10% power at this level would add exponential levels of stress and similarly shorten the teardown intervals. I am just thinking of how you can quarter a spark plug's useful life or how quickly the oil looks quite dark at the tuned level compared with untuned.

Additionally, I tend to spec my engines rather lower than is perhaps sensible for my power expectations and pay the price with reliability. But because the parts are so cheap I am prepared to exercise them

Still trying to work out where to go next with it. I could just put it back together as it is, but if it only comes out to get caned it might not last any longer? Or I could go down the route of built engines again... or depending on how it turns out.

For a reliable motor I would want it at 380/380 on a 20G in a new age STI. Thing is it is still a modified car and gives you hassles with insurance, maintenance and warranty. Which is why I decided to buy something normally aspirated that goes similarly (once rolling in the dry at least) to the 380 BHP STI as a daily driver. 12-15000 mile service intervals, warranty, 30% better fuel economy on a cruise, and hopefully more reliable. As an ownership proposition for a daily driver it should be quite good.

Without doubt I would get a 2.33 if they were still available from Crawford. As it is, that would be all that would be holding my car back as long as I was kind to the gearbox... (well the mapper holds it back a bit too ).

 

I'm not sure a new age TMIC could take 380/380 or rather the boost to make it.

I'm also not sure that a M3 is as fast as a new age STI with 380?

F

 

It has been done Floyd. Mark (EMS) did a car with 350 WHP using a TD06H-20G, headers, 3" exhaust, remap, fuel pump, injectors on a Euro STI with an EJ257 swap, stock induction. The bigger engine means boost levels similar to what you're running on your 2.0 so the adiabatic heating will not be any greater. I would have used the TD05H-20G though I think and tried to get away with the stock injectors. Andy has done a 2.0 STI on the stock TMIC to 400 + on a 20G as well.

Re the M3, they do grow on you, and are faster than they feel. They put down over 300 WHP, have no lag, no temperature fatigue and 80ms gearchanges. The book weight of 1570kg includes 75kg driver/luggage and 3/4 tank of fuel, whereas the STI weight does not. So they are near identical on weight. They seem to be very similar to a GC8 with 340 BHP on 16G/FMIC/headers/exhaust etc. T-uk and I followed one when we were setting up my GT30R and at 1 bar of boost we were only slowly gaining on it and he got a really good car length or two when he got on the throttle. So not a fireball, but good for a standard car/as a package.

 

I think if you keep it John, you won't want to do anything with it unless it's got a closed deck block of 2.2 or above.
I can't see you putting another 2.5 in there, only because you like to play with and tune your car to see what happens.
If there was a possibility you could see yourself enjoying *only* 400/400 in that Impreza, then yes, go for another 2.5, but i don't think you will be satisfied with that.

(not a criticism, only opinion)

 

We'll have to see how it all feels. Tempted to repair the gaskets and just run it at 1.4 bar and see should be more like 450/400 then, so about 350 BHP/ton which should be enough for anyone It always felt naughty using more as though it was going to break.

 

John, why not source a 2.2 and send it to Crawford?

I completely stripped mine down the other week, and i am currently building it back up for the new owner. Purely did this for my own piece of mind, that everything was ok before it went into somebody else's car.

On inspection we observed the following:

Omega Pistons - coked up again despite only running 250 miles since last cleaned. These have now been thoroughly cleaned and look almost like new.

PAR Rods - dont look as though they have been used, so just cleaned up.

Gudgeon Pins that came with the omegas - 2 cylindrical indents, crudely where the gap between the rod and piston is, on all 4 pins. These have now been replaced FOC.

Std Big end bearings - Some slight scoring, but nothing to worry about. New ACL bearings installed.

Std Main bearings - Again very slight scoring, but nothing to worry about. New ACL bearings installed.

Bore in perfect condition.

Steven

 

Sounds a good plan Steven. I already have the EJ257 crank, just need bearings, rods, pistons... where to get one and who to build it?

If I could rev it to 8000 RPM (just for flexibility even though the power will be flat from 5000 RPM if I run enough midrange which makes a quick car point to point) I think this turbo would feel nicer. I think even the present UK 6MT gearing would be OK with that as I would have higher road speed in each gear, although the present limit is 7500 I try to change at 7000 and usually the peak record is 7200 out of some sympathy to the standard balancing/pistons/rods.

Although I **think** I've kept the short motor intact with the pussyfoot tuning, if the headgasket issue was resolved to allow more power I'm sure the standard pistons would not be far behind. I just don't know the secret of keeping the heads on this EJ257, if I did I would just change the pistons and go for it... I think I've concluded it isn't up to it with these heads, but would GDB heads fix the issue or not?

 

Don't forget that EJ22T block is a phase 1 though John, so the phase 2 EJ257 crank won't drop straight in unfortunately

 

Andy? Either him or the guy he gets to do his.

Paul? He's done his own

Running mine with the ported heads and STi5 valvetrain, transformed it, it felt so much smoother, and didnt bat an eyelid at revving to 7800 limit (which i found by bouncing off it on my 1st drag run at TOTB)

 

Thanks Tim, had forgotten that. What needs to be done to make it fit?

Steven, were you running a 2.33 then? What bits did you use?

 

needs the block machining for the thrust bearing. Id use the guy that andy knows having spoken to him.

I also wouldnt bother as your gearbox wont be any good.

David

 

John, no, it was MY ej257 in Marks car at TOTB, with my new head and valvetrain setup. I have now sold my ej257 and i am going down the 2.33 route.

The reason -

If its going to be a toy, it better be a good toy

Steven

 

So gearbox options then?

 

PPG or a Dogbox.

 

PPG for the ratios or because it is stronger than 6MT?

 

Sorry John, it';s hard to tell on the rev counter what revs I'm pulling as the needle is pi$$ing about at the moment.
2600 sounded too low when I posted hence I raised it a bit


someone also questioned running 380 bhp on a new age I/C.
Well I expet the sTI item will take it fine. After all my MY02 WRX I/C is doing a sterling job (Not that I have measured the temps yet though)

 

My point was that 1.3bar is OK for periods on the STi TMIC but 1.4 and above tends to split them. They then need welding or reinforcing in some way. Not concerned about temps in particular.

John will no doubt want to stick 2.2bar up its pipe

F

 

I had no idea they were so weak Floyd, that is quite disappointing in a way, but 1.3 bar should be enough for 380/380 on a 2.5. I thought you were meaning it was flow restrictive or couldn't do the cooling at 380-400 BHP?

I used to run 1.5 bar through my MY00 TMIC albeit only on a hybrid TD04 but the pressure was there. Is the GDB STI one weaker? Bob put 1.5 bar+ through his STI TMIC, although not sure if it was any stronger being a JDM?

 

I ran 1.8 bar on my Sti7 intercooler for some time without issue. I did have a dump valve fitted though to protect it from pressure surges.
My 03 WRX runs 1.55 bar no problem on the same unit.

Andy

 

John, not flow restrictive or temp for the power you want. I think they are good for the power IMO but I've read at least 3 reports about split STi7/8 TMIC that were being 'pushed'. Marky Mark on P1WOC is the latest to succumb to this problem just the other week. 1.45bar IIRC. I said I was surprised he was getting away with it and then he comes back and says it's just started leaking at the seams

If Andy has got away with it then maybe it's pot luck that one batch survives and another doesn't? If it does split I think a weld along the crimped seam will cure it and allow more boost anyway.

The MY00 TMIC inc STI are made from different material and I've not read that anyone has split one but of course they can't handle the temps or flow as you know.

F

 

John, ratios and strength IMO. I personally think David's gearbox is on borrowed time whilst mated to his engine.

 

I think everything mechanical bolted around that engine is on borrowed time!