Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Tuesday September 16, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC General > Proven Power Bragging

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-03-2011, 09:36 PM   #51
jdpsearcher
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 291214
Join Date: Aug 2011
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Vancouver Washington
Vehicle:
2011 STI Sedan
PBP

Default

Agreed....Any results yet....
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
jdpsearcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2012, 01:10 PM   #52
AKSubieDubie
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 190003
Join Date: Sep 2008
Chapter/Region: AKIC
Location: Fairbanks Alaska
Vehicle:
2000 RSTi BW8375
Blue

Default

Also still curious about those super pistons
AKSubieDubie is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2012, 04:52 PM   #53
SubaruWrxNewb
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 236017
Join Date: Jan 2010
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Thomasville, NC
Vehicle:
2004 AW STi
2.5 w/ GTX35R, 500+ whp

Default

And the results are....?
SubaruWrxNewb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2012, 08:51 PM   #54
Equilibrium Tuning
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 26933
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Fairfield, CA
Vehicle:
2006 STI
CGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wrx_driver_2002 View Post
GT4094 0.95 T4 Exhaust Housing with:
Stock ECU running Speed Density
2mm Longer Rods
Kelford R-199-C AVCS cams (272/272 with 11.5mm Lift intake and 11.2 Exh)
Benson Sleeved Case
Manley Billet 75mm Crank
JE Pistons 99.5mm
Chapman Racing CNC Ported Cylinder Heads
1mm oversized stainless intake and inconel exhaust valves
Full Race Header and Uppipe
Cosworth Intake Manifold
BC Adjustable exhaust cam gears
AVCS Intake gears (Not running any avcs currently due to wrong neutral sw)




Comparison Graph between the spool of a 2.5 and a 2.34 with a GT4094 wth a 0.95exh housing:

The Graph that runs to 7,000 rpms is a 2.5L with custom kelford cams (276 Intake 272 Exh)
Aem Series 1 EMS
GT4094 0.95 T4 Exhaust Housing with:
2mm Longer Rods
Benson Sleeved Case
Manley Billet 75mm Crank
JE Pistons 99.5mm
Chapman Racing CNC Ported Cylinder Heads
1mm oversized stainless intake and inconel exhaust valves
Full Race Header and Uppipe
Cosworth Intake Manifold
BC Adjustable exhaust cam gears
AVCS Intake gears (Not running any avcs currently due to wrong neutral sw)

Graph that runs to 7500 rpms is the same graph that's posted by itself above 2.34 with R-199-C Cams (272 Int and Exh 11.5mm lift intake and 11.2 exh)
Can anyone explain the benefit of the 2.34l in this comparison? It seems that the 2.5 is a clear winner here.

-- Ed
Equilibrium Tuning is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2012, 08:56 PM   #55
RexFTW
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 107179
Join Date: Feb 2006
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Bensenville, IL
Vehicle:
2012 S4 Black
03 WRX S400 Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Equilibrium Tuning View Post
Can anyone explain the benefit of the 2.34l in this comparison? It seems that the 2.5 is a clear winner here.

-- Ed
I bet the 2.34 lays the smackdown on it when the car is dyno'd to 9-9.5 though.
RexFTW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2012, 09:02 PM   #56
mxturboracer86
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 82398
Join Date: Mar 2005
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Chicago
Vehicle:
2013 SXL
555 Motorsports

Default

The point would be, why have a powerband that starts at 6000rpm and goes to 9000 rpm when you can have a powerband with more tq that comes in sooner (say 5000rpm) and revs out to 8000-8500 rpm or even higher with a properly build 2.5

you would be achieving the same powerband without, with more tq and essentially faster response by not needing to be as high up in the RPM range to make power
mxturboracer86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2012, 09:16 PM   #57
NW2TONE
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 212509
Join Date: May 2009
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: marysville,WA
Vehicle:
unde your hood makin
your **** go faster

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Equilibrium Tuning View Post
Can anyone explain the benefit of the 2.34l in this comparison? It seems that the 2.5 is a clear winner here.

-- Ed
huge cams giant turbo and he doesnt even have avcs working. Id say not bad spool for that case. esp when that engine is gonna rev past 9k.
NW2TONE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2012, 09:21 PM   #58
NW2TONE
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 212509
Join Date: May 2009
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: marysville,WA
Vehicle:
unde your hood makin
your **** go faster

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mxturboracer86 View Post
The point would be, why have a powerband that starts at 6000rpm and goes to 9000 rpm when you can have a powerband with more tq that comes in sooner (say 5000rpm) and revs out to 8000-8500 rpm or even higher with a properly build 2.5

you would be achieving the same powerband without, with more tq and essentially faster response by not needing to be as high up in the RPM range to make power
that 40r is getting spool at 5300 without avcs working. thats good even for a 2.5
so more like 4500 with avcs and going to 9k equals a 4500 rpm powerband. show me a 2.5 with a solid 4.5k rpm powerband
NW2TONE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2012, 09:29 PM   #59
jdpsearcher
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 291214
Join Date: Aug 2011
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Vancouver Washington
Vehicle:
2011 STI Sedan
PBP

Default

One of the benefits for the LR engines is the ability to rev and carry the gear longer....So basically any highway pull the LR engine is going to be much faster due to the mechanical advantage and the VE of the motor itself....As long as the heads and intake are massaged to be in the same rpm range....I believe Micah with 3MI racing is working on such an intake and both Micah 3MI and Dom with MPS have heads that will work in a 9000rpm engine....I am not sure of any other builder working towards this type of engine....

If you look at the small cubic inch engines that are trying to compete in the 60-130mph times it takes HIGH rpms and HIGH horsepower in order to run good times....(the captain obvious statement)

When I build my block it is going to be an 11 to 1 LR 2.35 or 2.43 engine in hopes of spinning to 8500-9000 with two turbo selections.....A quick response turbo of a 35r and a high horsepower turbo of a 42r or so.....Granted the motor will only run on E85....

The bottom line is this....It is an individual choice in engine set up.....

I don't think many builders are going to recommend this style of motor (LR) for someone looking for under 500whp or serious daily driving...

The LR engines are going to shine in drag racing, mile racing, and road racing applications. I think the LR motor and a 35/37R would be an absolutely fantastic daily driver....

Last edited by jdpsearcher; 01-23-2012 at 09:43 PM.
jdpsearcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2012, 09:39 PM   #60
MrSlowbaru
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 129231
Join Date: Oct 2006
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Long Island NY
Vehicle:
2005 wrx
cgm

Default

I love my long rod motor so far. Full boost by 4000 on a turbonetics gtk500, 280 cams with headwork. Great for drivability. I have not been able to wind out any gears higher than third yet on my 07 sti tranny.
MrSlowbaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2012, 09:45 PM   #61
jdpsearcher
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 291214
Join Date: Aug 2011
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Vancouver Washington
Vehicle:
2011 STI Sedan
PBP

Default

What kind of power are you making....I bet that thing really pulls with the 07 gears....
jdpsearcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2012, 10:04 PM   #62
MrSlowbaru
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 129231
Join Date: Oct 2006
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Long Island NY
Vehicle:
2005 wrx
cgm

Default

I have not even finished tuning it yet. I just switched to e85, and speed density.
MrSlowbaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2012, 10:06 PM   #63
jdpsearcher
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 291214
Join Date: Aug 2011
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Vancouver Washington
Vehicle:
2011 STI Sedan
PBP

Default

No worries I was just curious.....
jdpsearcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2012, 10:09 PM   #64
Equilibrium Tuning
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 26933
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Fairfield, CA
Vehicle:
2006 STI
CGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mxturboracer86 View Post
The point would be, why have a powerband that starts at 6000rpm and goes to 9000 rpm when you can have a powerband with more tq that comes in sooner (say 5000rpm) and revs out to 8000-8500 rpm or even higher with a properly build 2.5

you would be achieving the same powerband without, with more tq and essentially faster response by not needing to be as high up in the RPM range to make power
This is exactly my view on the matter. The ONLY viable benefit I see from having to rev that high is to extend the gear range. Aside from that the larger displacement and less over square engine wins in every other category.

Maybe I'm missing something though.

-- Ed
Equilibrium Tuning is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2012, 10:19 PM   #65
EtoS
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 102238
Join Date: Dec 2005
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: I'm lost in Trenton
Vehicle:
08 DGM STi
*RIP* 06 WRX TR

Default

It's not suppose to end at 7500rpm. It's suppose to keep going upto 9k rpm. From the mods for the 2.34, the powerband was shifted all the way to the right and then you are comparing it to a motor with the powerband not shifted to the right as much. You can even see the 2.5 starting to run out of breath by 7k rpm while the 2.34 looks like it wants to keep going.

I have been in Doms 07 STi with his 2.34l motor with practically nothing done to the heads. It's a seriously smooth motor that while it doesn't have massive power before 4k rpm, it has pep in that range. It just WANTS to rev. Aside from the poor gas milage it gets, it makes for a fantastic DD IMO.
EtoS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2012, 10:27 PM   #66
Equilibrium Tuning
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 26933
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Fairfield, CA
Vehicle:
2006 STI
CGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EtoS View Post
It's not suppose to end at 7500rpm. It's suppose to keep going upto 9k rpm. From the mods for the 2.34, the powerband was shifted all the way to the right and then you are comparing it to a motor with the powerband not shifted to the right as much. You can even see the 2.5 starting to run out of breath by 7k rpm while the 2.34 looks like it wants to keep going.

I have been in Doms 07 STi with his 2.34l motor with practically nothing done to the heads. It's a seriously smooth motor that while it doesn't have massive power before 4k rpm, it has pep in that range. It just WANTS to rev. Aside from the poor gas milage it gets, it makes for a fantastic DD IMO.
That 2.5l setup could easily go to 8k+ RPM as well. Also notice its running less boost than the 2.34 and seems to be running out of fuel up top. I just don't understand why people think the 2.5's can't rev out. They're already fairly short stroke engines so piston speeds are not a big issue.

-- Ed
Equilibrium Tuning is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2012, 10:42 PM   #67
TDagen
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 163648
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Minnesota, mpls
Vehicle:
2002 Wrx,2.5L,HTA86
E85,2007 6mt,No traction

Default

At 9000rpm in 4th w/2007 6mt and 26" tires how fast do you think I'll be going?
TDagen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2012, 10:48 PM   #68
Big_DeWeY
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 37078
Join Date: May 2003
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: TH Motorsports
Vehicle:
95 L
Blue-ish

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Equilibrium Tuning View Post
That 2.5l setup could easily go to 8k+ RPM as well. Also notice its running less boost than the 2.34 and seems to be running out of fuel up top. I just don't understand why people think the 2.5's can't rev out. They're already fairly short stroke engines so piston speeds are not a big issue.

-- Ed
I think the purpose of the 2.34 is rod ratio more than anything. That's something I think we can all agree that the Subaru engines lack.
Big_DeWeY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2012, 10:59 PM   #69
Nuke209
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 108089
Join Date: Feb 2006
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Minnesota
Vehicle:
2003 WRX
NF Performance

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Equilibrium Tuning View Post
That 2.5l setup could easily go to 8k+ RPM as well. Also notice its running less boost than the 2.34 and seems to be running out of fuel up top. I just don't understand why people think the 2.5's can't rev out. They're already fairly short stroke engines so piston speeds are not a big issue.

-- Ed
Thank you
Nuke209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2012, 11:18 PM   #70
wrx_driver_2002
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 25952
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: Under your hood :-)
Vehicle:
1995 Impreza Coupe
w/ "Extras" :-)

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Equilibrium Tuning View Post
This is exactly my view on the matter. The ONLY viable benefit I see from having to rev that high is to extend the gear range. Aside from that the larger displacement and less over square engine wins in every other category.

Maybe I'm missing something though.

-- Ed
That first 2.34 Dyno graph was my break in tune. The engine essentially had about an hour of run time on it at this point, which is why It was only ran to 7500 rpms. It was utilizing the stock ECU and Speed Density via cobb AP. (This was done back in early august). However, the two graphs are not necessarily apples to apples comparison. I changed a number of things between the two engines.

The 2.34 has larger lift cams, a bigger exhaust housing (0.95 vs 0.85), and adjustable exhaust cam gears.

I did this engine because I wanted to try something new. It didn't cost me any extra to go this route than it would have cost me to go with a 2.5L setup. I do know of one local 2.5L engine that runs to 9k routinely at the drag strip, and he's been using the same engine for 2 seasons now I believe without any issues. He runs low to mid 9's pretty consistently with an almost identical setup to mine.

Back in November I had the chance to get the car back on the dyno. I changed the ID1000's out for a set of ID2000's and E85. I made some adjustments to the exhaust cam timing. I spooled 700 rpms earlier and gained 20-30wheel hp and 20-50 ft lbs of tq at the same 7500 rpm redline (As welll as over the entire rev range) and the same boost.

Hopefully on Feb 4th I will have it back on the dyno and run some real boost through it.




Here's the video from the very first time with a 2.5L... The car spun a rod bearing on the dyno about 15 minutes after this which is the whole reason I had to build an entirely new engine.

Last edited by wrx_driver_2002; 01-23-2012 at 11:58 PM.
wrx_driver_2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 12:45 AM   #71
jdpsearcher
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 291214
Join Date: Aug 2011
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Vancouver Washington
Vehicle:
2011 STI Sedan
PBP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Equilibrium Tuning View Post
That 2.5l setup could easily go to 8k+ RPM as well. Also notice its running less boost than the 2.34 and seems to be running out of fuel up top. I just don't understand why people think the 2.5's can't rev out. They're already fairly short stroke engines so piston speeds are not a big issue.

-- Ed
Ed,

I think it is just personal preference....The motor being better persay is upto the individual buying the motor....The 2.34 and 2.43L destroked LR motors have better volumetric effiency than the 2.5L....

It is really a moot point though....The bottom end is reliability....the power is in the breathing....

(Rant off topic) When is a company going to come out with a head/cam combo including upgrade/larger throttle body and a better intake manifold.....
jdpsearcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 01:03 AM   #72
NW2TONE
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 212509
Join Date: May 2009
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: marysville,WA
Vehicle:
unde your hood makin
your **** go faster

Default

I dont want people to think that all we build at MPS in destroked wonders (LOL). Every engine we build is custom tailored to that specific customers needs with their vehicle. We still build plenty of 2.5s, big bore 2.6s and big bore 2.34=2.5.
Driving both of them on a regular basis I must say I like the destroked engine. Its a whole lot smoother power and more controllable over the larger stroke 2.5. Some like torque down low and that large stroke engine. No problem with that. Plus the shorter stroke has better wear because of less sideloading. Thus maybe making it last longer in the long run.
Ill never put one in my Forester with a spec B 6sp though, that will stay 2.5.
NW2TONE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 01:17 AM   #73
jdpsearcher
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 291214
Join Date: Aug 2011
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Vancouver Washington
Vehicle:
2011 STI Sedan
PBP

Default

Has anyone decided to spec a specific gear set for the long rod motors to really take advantage of their powerband....
jdpsearcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 11:59 AM   #74
MrSlowbaru
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 129231
Join Date: Oct 2006
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Long Island NY
Vehicle:
2005 wrx
cgm

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDagen View Post
At 9000rpm in 4th w/2007 6mt and 26" tires how fast do you think I'll be going?
~150mph
MrSlowbaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 06:09 PM   #75
3MI Racing
Former Vendor
 
Member#: 200987
Join Date: Jan 2009
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: VA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Equilibrium Tuning View Post
Can anyone explain the benefit of the 2.34l in this comparison? It seems that the 2.5 is a clear winner here.

-- Ed
I think everyone already pointed out the vast differences in the setup. Also not that the EJ25 is peaked and the 2.34 is just at that plateau point.

Turn up the boost and see the peaks in the tq curve come out even more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_DeWeY View Post
I think the purpose of the 2.34 is rod ratio more than anything. That's something I think we can all agree that the Subaru engines lack.
It was to broaden and flatten the tq curve, yielding better timing in gear and a higher rate of averaged acceleration.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Equilibrium Tuning View Post
This is exactly my view on the matter. The ONLY viable benefit I see from having to rev that high is to extend the gear range. Aside from that the larger displacement and less over square engine wins in every other category.

Maybe I'm missing something though.

-- Ed
Keep in mind that I originally designed the engine around a 4" bore, so now you have the EJ25 stomping ability of the 2.34 but with only a lack of 32cc. Now keep in mind the long rod bringing up the VE where you actually use your car...at RPM.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Equilibrium Tuning View Post
That 2.5l setup could easily go to 8k+ RPM as well. Also notice its running less boost than the 2.34 and seems to be running out of fuel up top. I just don't understand why people think the 2.5's can't rev out. They're already fairly short stroke engines so piston speeds are not a big issue.

-- Ed
Yes, they can but it doesn't mean they're 'happy' and for the same RPM you have more stress on every component in the engine with the destroked engine...oh and your crank has more flex = loss of power

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDagen View Post
At 9000rpm in 4th w/2007 6mt and 26" tires how fast do you think I'll be going?
160 mph...just punched it into the spreadsheet.


To Ed,

Put simply, a lot of guys don't understand the intricacies of the destroked setups (where large companies did EJ25 development) and probably why there have been so many shops trying to knock off what Dom and I came up with but without the engineering to make it work. There is a reason I literally spent a year doing the original engineering work on the engine before the first prototype was made. Since then, Dom and I still share experiences and ideas and further develop the package. Dom didn't step out with his publicly until early 09 IIRC. Mine are still largely behind closed doors...just a hint, there are some new puzzle pieces over 10k
My largest gripe with the knock offs, other than trying to steal IP (), is that they suck at it and make the engine look bad when really it is just them and their research that sucks.

-Micah
'Homemade WRX'
3MI Racing is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Maxwell Power Tuned, 2.35L GT35R 537whp and 9k rpm, 4K rpm power band Maxwell Power Proven Power Bragging 563 05-16-2012 08:28 PM
FS : Built sleeved 2.5 block and built 2.0 heads + more sleepysubie Engine/Power/Exhaust 7 06-30-2011 12:50 PM
Maxwell Power Tuned, 2.6L Crawford HTA-GT3582R, 587 AWHP leonbmx Proven Power Bragging 72 10-31-2010 09:16 PM
Maxwell Power Tuned, 2.5L Twinscroll T4 S300sx 574WHP alcoolaid Proven Power Bragging 61 10-22-2010 08:49 PM
What were the results from the Tacoma show? Subarutex North West Impreza Club Forum -- NWIC 6 09-02-2003 01:58 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.