EJ20 Strokered to 2.3
10 May 2014, 01:50 PM
#1
EJ20 Strokered to 2.3
How is this done? As the kit says it has 96mm pistons but I thought the maximum size for an ej20 was 92.5?
I presume the block would need boring and sleeving? Could this be done on a CDB?
Has anyone ever run one of these kits? If so is there a linkt o any information on it?
Thanks
I presume the block would need boring and sleeving? Could this be done on a CDB?
Has anyone ever run one of these kits? If so is there a linkt o any information on it?
Thanks
10 May 2014, 02:12 PM
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Enginetuner.co.uk Plymouth Dyno Dynamics RR Engine machining and building EcuTek SimTek mapping
Posts: 3,662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How is this done? As the kit says it has 96mm pistons but I thought the maximum size for an ej20 was 92.5?
I presume the block would need boring and sleeving? Could this be done on a CDB?
Has anyone ever run one of these kits? If so is there a linkt o any information on it?
Thanks
I presume the block would need boring and sleeving? Could this be done on a CDB?
Has anyone ever run one of these kits? If so is there a linkt o any information on it?
Thanks
10 May 2014, 02:14 PM
#3
Its just something I have found while boredom internet searching and was wondering if it was a viable alternative to an ej22? I presume sleeving etc isnt cheap?
I was actually looking at cams and what not for my current set up and got distracted hah.
http://www.briancrower.com/makes/sub..._stroker.shtml
I was actually looking at cams and what not for my current set up and got distracted hah.
http://www.briancrower.com/makes/sub..._stroker.shtml
10 May 2014, 07:26 PM
#6
It looks like they're really using 96mm pistons,
when you calculate displacement (just for stroke) for 75mm and 79mm stroke it matches OK
96mm pistons with 75mm stroke is 2171cc
96mm pistons with 79mm stroke is 2287cc
Or did I go wrong somewhere
when you calculate displacement (just for stroke) for 75mm and 79mm stroke it matches OK
96mm pistons with 75mm stroke is 2171cc
96mm pistons with 79mm stroke is 2287cc
Or did I go wrong somewhere
Trending Topics
11 May 2014, 07:47 AM
#8
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (67)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: w,yorkshire
Posts: 4,061
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11 May 2014, 07:58 AM
#10
to buy a 2.0l cdb then have it fitted with new liners will cost as much as buying a 2.2l block.then you have the chance of the new liners settling and having to strip the motor down again.or even worse,if you take the block to chy at pennine Subaru for your liners fitting,he will fit the liners at a 45deg angle so your pistons will be going up an down sideways
I think ill give him a miss then haha! I already have a 2.0 CDB hence I was wondering on the cost of this compared to buying a new ej22 and doing it that way!
Ive never heard of that, what is the point in that?!
11 May 2014, 08:54 AM
#13
I couldn't get my head around it either lol. I don't think the bore changes, the stroke goes down from the less throw of the 2l crank. I can't remember the exact figures but 75mm x 99.5mm bore = 2333cc.
Last edited by Kwik; 11 May 2014 at 08:55 AM.
11 May 2014, 11:51 AM
#16
I just dont see how that works in the slightest! It makes no sense, so if someone wants to elaborate! (Alan?)
Yes bore and sleeve a CDB ej20 to 2.3 will give you a definite increase in torque and power etc. But downsizing a 2.5 should surely decrease the above? To which the point of all this work is surely to get MORE?
Yes bore and sleeve a CDB ej20 to 2.3 will give you a definite increase in torque and power etc. But downsizing a 2.5 should surely decrease the above? To which the point of all this work is surely to get MORE?
12 May 2014, 10:49 AM
#28
Just about all the built 2.3's in the US appear to be destroked pinned semi CDB 2.5's, but I don't see the point as the upstroked 2.2 will rev every bit as much, but has the advantage of the much stronger 2.2 CDB.
It's interesting how the different approaches become the accepted norm so quickly either side of the Atlantic e.g. they swear by liners, whereas my instinctive reaction is that I associate liners with dropping, no matter how well they are done.
It's interesting how the different approaches become the accepted norm so quickly either side of the Atlantic e.g. they swear by liners, whereas my instinctive reaction is that I associate liners with dropping, no matter how well they are done.
12 May 2014, 01:57 PM
#29
Just about all the built 2.3's in the US appear to be destroked pinned semi CDB 2.5's, but I don't see the point as the upstroked 2.2 will rev every bit as much, but has the advantage of the much stronger 2.2 CDB.
It's interesting how the different approaches become the accepted norm so quickly either side of the Atlantic e.g. they swear by liners, whereas my instinctive reaction is that I associate liners with dropping, no matter how well they are done.
It's interesting how the different approaches become the accepted norm so quickly either side of the Atlantic e.g. they swear by liners, whereas my instinctive reaction is that I associate liners with dropping, no matter how well they are done.
We are talking about a CDB EJ20 stroked to 2.3 though
