Ive heard the 2.5 engine is not as good as the 2.0 engine because of head gasket problems , just wondering if this is true . Also is the sti 2.5 engine just as bad as the wrx 2.5 engine . If head gaskets go is there a better solution of fixing them ,what i am trying to say are they as bad as the rover engines of old

 

Different compression ratios between the 2.5 wrx and sti

Best to go with the 2.0 safely run upto 500 on the standard engine I run mine upto 470 at 1.9 bar

Steve

 

The 2.5 is a great engine, for road manners/drivability/torque theres no replacement for displacement.

Uprate the HG's, studs, and a lower rating thermostat to keep the temps in check and theyre pretty bomb proof.... oh and get a reputable mapper rather than someone who likes to venture too far into det to find the limits.

For big power then the cdb2.2 builds are stronger, but for most peoples mid power builds I think theyre the block to go for.

Ive got a fresh ej257 for sale if needed.

 

I thought the 2.0 engines were better , the reason for the question was i am thinking of getting another scooby ,do i go for a classic or bugeye as ive got around £4000 to spend on a second car or do i go all in part ex my hyundai tucson and have around £7500 to £8000 and get 2.5 hatch as i need room in the boot for the dog

 

Betters a bit of a sweeping statement isn't it?

You might want to quantify it a bit.

A good 2.5 against a good 2.0 ..... all other things being equal the 2.5 takes it purely on torque surely. :-)

 

OMG , i get about as bored of 2.5 engine threads as I do of F1 Fan's righteous bollox.

Can we please have a sticky summarising the thousand or so threads all dedicated to this chocolate pile of crap please mods?

or a divvies guide to using the search engine?

 

Yeah, theres a lot of forum warriors out there who like something to latch onto and make discussions very one sided for no other reason than they want something to complain about..... shame really as because theres so many of them they tend to get listened to.

My 2.5's had a moderate amount of work, a nice conservative map to 440/440 and its been going for years and taking all the track time I can throw at it ..... so glad I didn't believe all the "chocolate" BS and just get the 2.0 rebuilt.

 

Your not going to get an sti hatch for 7500-8000 that's blob sti territory

Legacy what spec is your fresh 2.5 engine?

Steve

 

Its a low mileage (18k) ej257. Unopened long block with single AVCS heads.

I bought it a year or so ago with plans for a project, but since then a change of job/house has changed things and its surplus.

If someone just wanted a short block we could come to an arrangement im sure.

Steve, sorry to hijack the thread ...... but have you considered a forester sti at that price range? the dog would love it! :-)

 

no probs mate ,i quite like them but i would have to p/ex my other car and that means getting one from a garage so price would prob to high.

 

Couldn't agree more, well said.

 

2.5 out of the factory is pretty crap reliability wise, wrx and sti, known for doing ring lands and head gaskets.

However built right they are awesome and better road tuned engine than a 2.0, you just can't beat the torque they produce

 

You see this is exactly what we're talking about. Its not crap, thats just inaccurate, yes its not as strong as the EJ205, people need to understand the EJ205 was over engineered, we were spoilt. Yes some EJ257 standard units have blown HG's n ringlands, on the other hand there's lots of 2.5STi's which are still running very well and into 70/80K mileages with zero issues. I have a few mates who have 06 hawk and 08-10STi's who drive the absolute **** out of them on a daily basis and have had no problems. The key thing with all of them is they are modified by people who know what they are doing and MAPPED properly within their limits, so anywhere from 330-400bhp. Usually its ones thats have been modifed past its limits that die, again there are exceptions like the guy above. Also if you actually spend some time delving a bit deeper into the failure stats, from reputable sources, rather than relying on info from disgruntled owners on an internet forum you will see a different story.

 

well mine let go, a standard wrx with ringland failure, full service history etc etc so it goes way beyond just bad mapping/maint etc

I do agree the figures prob get over egged, but given how many got replaced under warrenty (guy on here had 3 replacements) and the number of people with them gone on the rather large thread then its pretty obvious is was a weak point.

I doubt the exact failure figures will be known, but to say its the owners fault and the engine was fine is tosh.

 

If you read what i typed, I didn't say ALL owners are to blame, we all know there have been failures and to begin with they were poorly handled by IM. However all manufacturers have failures, no standard engine is bulletproof, but there are alot of cases where people have stated the engine was standard, it blew, then it turns out there were lots of different factors involved, including poor maintenance and/or poor tuning/lack of knowledge, run on the wrong fuel. And of course if you ever bought the car 2nd hand what history does it have, how was it driven by the previous owner. A full SH isn't always a good indicator of the cars life. Again im not saying that was the case with yours.

 

mine failed before i got it, engine to my spec was put in it when i bought it

tbf any car treated crap will never last

 

Maybe it wasnt put together right Indeed mechanical sympathy does play a part.

 

Don't think anyone ever informed my ratty runabout forester of this fact!

 

actualy i think forresters and old leggys may be an exception judging by some i see going,,, hahahaha

 

When I said I wanted to go 2.5 litre, the late, great Harvey Smith advised fully forged and with a decent set of head gaskets.

I can't fault it.

 

built right they make an epic road engine

 

I'm running a wrx hatch 2.5 it has been perfect I've had it for a year now and it's much nicer to drive than any of my classic 2.0lt sti. I can't fault 2.5 take as you find it must be luck of the draw.

 

I've got a 2.0 doesn't use any oil between services or at all also it doesn't over heat and it has lots of torque.

 

So you can use it you mean?

BTW the 2.5 is fantastic engine in all standard guises. Get one bought, you'll be fine

 

fallen off chair... not sure if sarcasm or not

 

£8k will see you in a rough Hatch STI, that's a large bill waiting to happen. You want to buy a cherished car really.

You could always buy a WRX hatch but that's a bit of a dog imo.

 

666BHP LAST TIME IT WAS DYNO'D BEFORE THE DRAG RUN.

The tuner acknowledges there are faulty 2.5 bottom ends from factory but they claim nearly all 2.5 failures are from the heat generated by the up-pipe, down-pipe and turbo destroying the near by cylinder 3. They claim if you conquer heat management then the stock 2.5 short motor is very capable.

 

How come then its always cylinder 2 & 4 that fail, very rare for 3 to fail, in fact I have not seen any issues with cyl 3, even on my 800bhp 2.35's.

 

Obviously RS Matt knows more then you, come on its not like you build engines all day!!!

 

Yes, your quite right, what do I know.