Notices
ScoobyNet General General Subaru Discussion

who needs 2.5L Engine?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 28 September 2005, 08:28 PM
  #1  
minted_aye
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
minted_aye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Talking who needs 2.5L Engine?

Just read JTuner this month and was unaware that Roger Clarke managed to squeeze an amazing 709 bhp @ 7,500rpm and 890 bhp with a touch of the laughing gas from the 2ltr EJ20, as I DRIVE an sti ppp 2002, I myself was looking at the 2.2 or 2.5 bottom, dont think I will bother with results like that from the 2.0L block, getting 400bhp should be a doddle.
Old 28 September 2005, 08:31 PM
  #2  
paulsti8
Scooby Regular
 
paulsti8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Seen this car run 1/4 mile a few times, awesome bit of kit with a great sound.
Old 28 September 2005, 08:55 PM
  #3  
ALi-B
Moderator
Support Scoobynet!
iTrader: (1)
 
ALi-B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The hell where youth and laughter go
Posts: 38,034
Received 301 Likes on 240 Posts
Default

Like any engine, 400bhp is possible.

The question is how long it will do that for?

That 890bhp monster probably doesn't see 5000miles before a rebuild
Old 28 September 2005, 11:16 PM
  #4  
Big C
Scooby Regular
 
Big C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Now showing in Texas....
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ALi-B

That 890bhp monster probably doesn't see 5000miles before a rebuild
Or even 500 mls....

C
Old 28 September 2005, 11:36 PM
  #5  
MAFFA
Scooby Regular
 
MAFFA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Down South to Ooop North to Back Down South again!!
Posts: 6,633
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Question

Is that the one from Iceland that was at TOTB? Fecking quick that was
Old 28 September 2005, 11:39 PM
  #6  
RRH
Scooby Regular
 
RRH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Just far enough from sunny Liverpool
Posts: 6,963
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Certainly very impressive figures, but at 'sensible' levels don't knock a 2.5 until you've driven one; so much more driveable
Old 29 September 2005, 08:12 AM
  #7  
minted_aye
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
minted_aye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Hi

I think you are missing the point, for quite sometime, and I doubt anyone will disagree, all the tuners were pointing persons like myself down the 2.5L conversion, what I am saying this company running 700bhp from a 2.0L Block, proves that you do not have to got down this route, its the worlds quickest, and if the 2.5L was a better bet why does it not hold the world record?

Its certainly made me stick with the 2.0L on my sti ppp as the way forward, I am not knocking the 2.5L just saying that you obviously dont need one for big power and the case has already been proven by RCM


Originally Posted by RRH
Certainly very impressive figures, but at 'sensible' levels don't knock a 2.5 until you've driven one; so much more driveable
Old 29 September 2005, 08:15 AM
  #8  
minted_aye
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
minted_aye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I have been informed that 400bhp from a 2002 STI with standard internals with no major problems, I am not after big power just 400bhp will be a nice touch, so if any tuners can advise a way forward please send me a PM, currently running a 2002 sti ppp



Originally Posted by ALi-B
Like any engine, 400bhp is possible.

The question is how long it will do that for?

That 890bhp monster probably doesn't see 5000miles before a rebuild
Old 29 September 2005, 12:31 PM
  #9  
ex-webby
Orange Club
 
ex-webby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1998
Posts: 13,763
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

I believe the 2.2 motor is no longer produced (used to go to 2.3 etc), so unless someone starts to cast these blocks people will now be limited in a way.

400bhp on my JDM MY03 engine is fairly straight forward.

Regards,
Shaun.
Old 29 September 2005, 01:48 PM
  #10  
minted_aye
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
minted_aye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

can you send some info across please? as I have the ppp and been told the ecu is locked down!

Originally Posted by webmaster
I believe the 2.2 motor is no longer produced (used to go to 2.3 etc), so unless someone starts to cast these blocks people will now be limited in a way.

400bhp on my JDM MY03 engine is fairly straight forward.

Regards,
Shaun.
Old 29 September 2005, 02:03 PM
  #11  
Andy M3
Scooby Regular
 
Andy M3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Chesterfield
Posts: 2,939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I don't know loads about each engine - but it has taken me years to establish that quoted bhp is only at one particular point of a rev range, usually peak power. There is so much more information that has to be looked at before you dismiss the larger engine.

The on road power delivery is what counts. A 2.5 has more power and more torque lower down so i would imagine [in theory] a 350hp 2.0 will not be as spicy as the same car with 350hp 2.5 ?
Old 02 October 2005, 12:05 AM
  #12  
simb 2
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
simb 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: South Wales - Stuck on this rollercoaster, get me off!!
Posts: 5,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by minted_aye
Hi

I think you are missing the point, for quite sometime, and I doubt anyone will disagree, all the tuners were pointing persons like myself down the 2.5L conversion, what I am saying this company running 700bhp from a 2.0L Block, proves that you do not have to got down this route, its the worlds quickest, and if the 2.5L was a better bet why does it not hold the world record?

Its certainly made me stick with the 2.0L on my sti ppp as the way forward, I am not knocking the 2.5L just saying that you obviously dont need one for big power and the case has already been proven by RCM

I would'nt say it was the world's quickest, I think Andy F holds this in his 2.3.

simb
Old 02 October 2005, 08:44 AM
  #13  
RoRu
Scooby Regular
 
RoRu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The Rock
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by simb 2
I would'nt say it was the world's quickest, I think Andy F holds this in his 2.3.

simb
I think you'll find the world quickest Impreza is owned by an Australian called Tony Rigoli his WRX wagon IIRC ran a 8.8@mid150's but i think its larger than 2.0ltr.

The RCM team Iceland car hold the record for the quickest manual 2.0ltr car.

Not sure Andy F holds the top speed record as he did a 199.6mph recently I've not heard of another Impreza going any faster.
Old 02 October 2005, 12:48 PM
  #14  
simb 2
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
simb 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: South Wales - Stuck on this rollercoaster, get me off!!
Posts: 5,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Sorry mate, I should of said I was on about a top speed run

simb
Old 07 December 2005, 08:13 PM
  #15  
Nick Read
Scooby Regular
 
Nick Read's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Suffolk
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I'm weighing up 2.0 vs 2.5 myself at the moment. But I don't think anyone (who knows basic turbo/engine theory) doubts that 700 or even 800 bhp is possible out of only 2 litres. They used to make 1.5 litre F1 engines that made 1500bhp when they turned up the wick for qualifying laps (using crazy boost levels). It's just a question of building the engine strong enough to take the boost and revs and Bob's your uncle. Problem is in the real world this kind of engineering takes a hell of a lot of money and time.

The real problem is not making the power, but making it useable in an everyday car. In general the more power you want, the more revs you need to be able to use. But the higher the peak power you extract from an engine, the more 'peaky' it gets leaving you with a sluggish motor when you're in the low or mid range. 'There's no replacement for displacement' as the saying goes, and a all other things being equal a 2.5 litre lump will always outperform a 2.0 at the same level of tune. Of course things aren't always equal but I'd imagine in almost every road driving situation, 2.5 litres is handier performance-wise than 2.0. If you've ever driven a big 3.5 V6 or something similar, and then driven a 1.4 turbo, the two might have similar power outputs but the delivery is totally different. For everyday use the big lump is preferable because it has a much wider spread of power and torque.
Old 07 December 2005, 08:26 PM
  #16  
rooferman
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (6)
 
rooferman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Andy f has run 211 mph recently,it was plastered over his car at santapod raceway.Fastest impreza in the world.

Not sure Andy F holds the top speed record as he did a 199.6mph recently I've not heard of another Impreza going any faster.[/QUOTE]
Old 08 December 2005, 11:01 AM
  #17  
Adam M
Scooby Regular
 
Adam M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 7,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

If I could start over and was looking to get more performance, if I had a standard car that was working I would aim for around the 350bhp to 380bhp on standard internals using a twin scroll turbo if possible.

On the road, there are few cars that would stay with an impreza so equipped/

If I were replacing a broken engine in my car and wanted the cheapest best start, I would fit an EJ257 with uprated pistons.

If I were going for an all out power build, I would use a normal stroke ej20 relinered to 97mm or an ej22, both of which would give a 2.2 that could rev very cleanly to produce lots of power but would also be a fully closed edck block and therefore stronger when running at the high power levels.

i would be really keen to know how often the icelandic car has been rebuilt. I don't think Andy would be so arrogant as to assume his engine would hold together indefinitely.

Basically, the higher the power the more often you rebuild. Hence my choice of a standard internals ej20 with a twin scroll at 350+bhp.
Old 08 December 2005, 11:16 AM
  #18  
Brendan Hughes
Scooby Regular
 
Brendan Hughes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: same time, different place
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

What's harvey's car? 2.0?
Old 08 December 2005, 05:11 PM
  #19  
wide
Scooby Regular
 
wide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I thought one of the main plus points of a 2.5 was stronger internals due to less stress and bottom end torque? Irrespective of massive power gain??
Old 08 December 2005, 05:20 PM
  #20  
David_Wallis
Scooby Regular
 
David_Wallis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Leeds - It was 562.4bhp@28psi on Optimax, How much closer to 600 with race fuel and a bigger turbo?
Posts: 15,239
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Harveys is / was a 2litre last time I spoke to him.

Dont forget the rcms / team ice car used nitrous to get the top figure.

If your building a high performance road engine and drive it like it should be driven then dont bother with more than 400bhp. IMHO.

David
Old 08 December 2005, 06:48 PM
  #21  
harvey
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (48)
 
harvey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Darlington
Posts: 10,419
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

The last engine was 2 litre (585 bhp) with open deck block. It did around 33k miles before I removed it from the car. During that time I had to replace a cylinder head twice. Once when an HKS plug dropped its insulator and the second time, probably because of an issue with my own mapping while running race fuel. Other than that, it was totally reliable.
The current engine is also 2 litre but a CDB sleeved down from 2.2 litre and the target is to exceed 600bhp.
The car was every day transport with the first engine and is intended to be used daily with this new engine.

I have been periferally involved with a 2 litre with a twin scroll turbo and a number of other mods. Earlier this week it did 350 bhp and 380 ft/lbs which makes it a very pleasant and fast cross country vehicle. I am interested to see how the next twin scroll performs because IF it is very torquey, then, despite the low bhp figure, this is possibly the way to get a quick road car for not a lot of work/dosh.
Old 08 December 2005, 06:55 PM
  #22  
Adam M
Scooby Regular
 
Adam M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 7,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

how is the sleeved down engine coming along harvey?

should be very interesting.

Must say, while I am not a fan of the 2.0 in terms of it not being as large a capacity as it could be, I am a big fan of its 75mm stroke.

EJ22 for me, all the way.
Old 08 December 2005, 09:05 PM
  #23  
TonyBurns
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
TonyBurns's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: 1600cc's of twin scroll fun :)
Posts: 25,565
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Wink

I think the 2.3 is the way to do it if your going for serious power, but dont underestimate the 2ltr, the 2.5 is flawed but as said, makes for easy power (to a point), still not as good as a JDM twin scroll setup
Nice to see your still about Harvey you still have the 2 cars?

Tony

PS which turbo's are you experimenting with the twin scroll?
Old 08 December 2005, 10:04 PM
  #24  
stevebt
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (8)
 
stevebt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,732
Received 33 Likes on 19 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by David_Wallis
Harveys is / was a 2litre last time I spoke to him.

Dont forget the rcms / team ice car used nitrous to get the top figure.

If your building a high performance road engine and drive it like it should be driven then dont bother with more than 400bhp. IMHO.

David
so why do you bother david only kidding



Originally Posted by harvey
I have been periferally involved with a 2 litre with a twin scroll turbo and a number of other mods. Earlier this week it did 350 bhp and 380 ft/lbs which makes it a very pleasant and fast cross country vehicle. I am interested to see how the next twin scroll performs because IF it is very torquey, then, despite the low bhp figure, this is possibly the way to get a quick road car for not a lot of work/dosh.

we shall see if it is the way to go as im getting mine back from deadbolt with a compressor housing upgrade and i can compare mine to a a td05/06 at 1.5bar from experience

Last edited by stevebt; 08 December 2005 at 10:11 PM.
Old 09 December 2005, 10:01 AM
  #25  
alexf2003
Scooby Regular
 
alexf2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by wide
I thought one of the main plus points of a 2.5 was stronger internals due to less stress and bottom end torque? Irrespective of massive power gain??
Erm it doesnt work like that....

The more power you make, the more "stresses" there are on the engine.



Alex
Old 09 December 2005, 10:35 AM
  #26  
Jay m A
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
 
Jay m A's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Class record holder at Pembrey Llandow Goodwood MIRA Hethel Blyton Curborough Lydden and Snetterton
Posts: 8,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

My 95 STI RA up until yesterday was a 2.0 TD05-16g with bolt on mods running approx 330hp / 300 Lbft at 1.4 bar boost. - 1.0 bar at 3100 in 5th

Now its a 2.5 litre, yet to be mapped, but with all the same mods it should be a 330/330 motor at 1.1 bar boost. Less stresses regarding heat and turbo, not only will 1.0 bar come earlier (with more power than 1bar on a 2.0), but the spread of power and torque will be huge compared with the 2.0.

The 257 block I have has the OE pistons, which I believe are fine for my goal of 400/400 - once I can afford the gearbox upgrade and the 20g conversion.

400hp is relatively easy to achieve on 2.0 with good advice, but if the bottom end needs replacing for any reason then for the money an OE257 is a no brainer IMO
Old 09 December 2005, 09:17 PM
  #27  
DaveBlueRA
Scooby Regular
 
DaveBlueRA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Derby
Posts: 938
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by minted_aye
Just read JTuner this month and was unaware that Roger Clarke managed to squeeze an amazing 709 bhp @ 7,500rpm and 890 bhp with a touch of the laughing gas from the 2ltr EJ20, as I DRIVE an sti ppp 2002, I myself was looking at the 2.2 or 2.5 bottom, dont think I will bother with results like that from the 2.0L block, getting 400bhp should be a doddle.
890bhp but heard it cost £140,000
And i have heard of a place in america i think that as got a 2.5 to over 1000bhp

Last edited by DaveBlueRA; 09 December 2005 at 09:22 PM.
Old 09 December 2005, 11:09 PM
  #28  
alibwagon
Scooby Newbie
 
alibwagon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Mileham, Norfolk
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default 2.2 engine

Hi, i have been looking at the 2.2 and 2.5l engines and recon the best is the 2.2l and a company in the usa called COBB sell a 2.2l short engine with forged internals for less than £1900. and a forged 2.5L for £1750.

From what i have come across the 2.2l seems to be better as it will rev much higher than the 2.5l.

If anyone is interested try looking at this site:

http://www.cobbtuning.com/wrx/engine...-tuner.html#22
Old 10 December 2005, 02:09 AM
  #29  
Mo
Scooby Regular
 
Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the fastest rentals in town......0-100mph in 10 seconds
Posts: 1,401
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

but dont underestimate the 2ltr, the 2.5 is flawed but as said, makes for easy power (to a point)
Why exactly is the 2.5ltr flawed?

Agreed that it may not be the way forward for applications subject to high cylinder pressures but flawed?? With the right piston design I'm sure it works well with 2.0ltr heads.

Last edited by Mo; 10 December 2005 at 02:10 AM. Reason: to add quote
Old 11 December 2005, 09:34 PM
  #30  
harvey
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (48)
 
harvey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Darlington
Posts: 10,419
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Adam : The STi 6 Wagon has a basic map at present and will have a proper mapping session to allow running in prior to Christmas.
Tony : I have 5 Subaru Wagons at present. A GL, 2 STi 3 Wagons, a 400 bhp WRX Wagon (Silver) and STi 6 Silver Wagon.
I am about to put the WRX Wagon up for sale. It is a very special car and wants for nothing with many unique features.
The blue STi 3 Wagon will be for sale after an engine rebuild, some gas flowing of the heads, ported headers etc..
I am working on 2 Ion turbos at present and have put together an odd TD05-06 20G one of which is on the WRX but mounted in a novel way.


Quick Reply: who needs 2.5L Engine?



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:40 PM.