sti block compared to wrx block
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2007
Location: kent
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sti block compared to wrx block
I keep seeing people selling sti blocks etc, is there an advantage to having the sti block compared to the wrx?
can they take more power before they go pop?
etc
And if i got a 2.5 block from a newage second hand would i be puchin my luck as i've been looking an they seem rather cheap.
If i did this how hard is this to change? Possible to do it in a garage at home with two mates that are mechanics or woulds i hit problems? then get it mapped at a tuning garage.
can they take more power before they go pop?
etc
And if i got a 2.5 block from a newage second hand would i be puchin my luck as i've been looking an they seem rather cheap.
If i did this how hard is this to change? Possible to do it in a garage at home with two mates that are mechanics or woulds i hit problems? then get it mapped at a tuning garage.
Last edited by osborne; 11 December 2007 at 08:38 AM. Reason: mi**** keys
#3
Former Sponsor
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: 10.68 QT mile in 2007 2.33 Type R ** Current 2002 Spec C 2.33 Track prepped.
Posts: 1,658
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wrx will generally be open deck and the STI semi closed but this will also depend on year etc as it’s not always the case. Using a semi closed deck will give you a stronger base over the open deck and so on.
The 2.5 uses the semi closed deck with larger bores and greater stroke to achieve the 2.5 displacement. And will ultimately be a better choice for a road car. I personally would suggest if considering a conversion like this you need to be well rehearsed to carry this out correctly and is best left to a tuner if your not.
Also bear in mind its not just the block that makes a strong motor there are plenty of open deck blocks running good power its only worth considering the block if your going for a full build. I would suggest looking at rods and pistons first.
The 2.5 uses the semi closed deck with larger bores and greater stroke to achieve the 2.5 displacement. And will ultimately be a better choice for a road car. I personally would suggest if considering a conversion like this you need to be well rehearsed to carry this out correctly and is best left to a tuner if your not.
Also bear in mind its not just the block that makes a strong motor there are plenty of open deck blocks running good power its only worth considering the block if your going for a full build. I would suggest looking at rods and pistons first.
#5
Former Sponsor
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: 10.68 QT mile in 2007 2.33 Type R ** Current 2002 Spec C 2.33 Track prepped.
Posts: 1,658
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Generally speaking it’s good to go for a new crank on a forged build considering the cost of a new crank and having the existing reground Amongst other things like wear etc, however the standard crank is perfectly capable in a forged motor and is used in most if not all big builds.
#6
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (22)
For the earlier classics some were closed deck majority were open deck.
The later classics there was no differences in the WRX and STI blocks as they are both open deck.
Differences are in pistons and valve train on the heads.
This is the same with all cars up until the 2.5 sti was released. The 2.5 STI is obvioulsy a bigger capacity and is of the semi closed deck variety.
I think I've got that right.
Daz
The later classics there was no differences in the WRX and STI blocks as they are both open deck.
Differences are in pistons and valve train on the heads.
This is the same with all cars up until the 2.5 sti was released. The 2.5 STI is obvioulsy a bigger capacity and is of the semi closed deck variety.
I think I've got that right.
Daz
#7
Former Sponsor
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: 10.68 QT mile in 2007 2.33 Type R ** Current 2002 Spec C 2.33 Track prepped.
Posts: 1,658
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The early new age sti also had a semi closed deck iirc
Last edited by Slowboy Racing; 16 December 2007 at 10:24 AM.