Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Wednesday August 27, 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 Technical > Normally Aspirated Powertrain

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 04-11-2003, 04:37 PM   #1
Brad Pittiful
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 34931
Join Date: Apr 2003
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: A Town Called Malice
Vehicle:
. .
This ain't no picnic!

Default why not more than 165hp in an RS 97 to 04

Ive always wondered why didnt Subaru put more umph in the early RS's... why not 180 to 200 hp since the WRX wasnt being sold here...i tried looking in the archive for a thread on this but couldnt find it there
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Brad Pittiful is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2003, 04:49 PM   #2
North Ursalia
Miss You Mom
Oct 1940 - Feb 2008

Super Moderator
 
Member#: 809
Join Date: Jan 2000
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: NH, Land Of Many Trees
Vehicle:
2000 2.5 RS, '14 For
92 5MT SVX

Default

Because they didn't want to make/use a whole slew of engines . They had been using the 2.5L engine in the Legacy since 1996. Same reason the "base" engine in every Subaru nowadays is the 2.5L. It used to be the 2.2, and the 1.8 previous to that, the 1.6 before that, etc etc .


Brian

North Ursalia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2003, 05:08 PM   #3
Brad Pittiful
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 34931
Join Date: Apr 2003
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: A Town Called Malice
Vehicle:
. .
This ain't no picnic!

Default

they couldnt use the 2.5 and juice it some more...seems odd that they cant get more out of it w/o using a turbo
Brad Pittiful is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2003, 05:33 PM   #4
ImprezaTs
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 1086
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Richmond-->Fort Smith NWT
Vehicle:
99 Impreza TS
Black Diamond Pearl

Default

I think Subaru had juiced out the 4 cyclinder more then other car companies did. Is there a NA 4 cyclinder engine that produces more HP then Subarus?
ImprezaTs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2003, 06:02 PM   #5
joefocker20
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 13745
Join Date: Dec 2001
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Vehicle:
2004 STI
Silver

Default

Theres plenty of them..
joefocker20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2003, 06:03 PM   #6
That Guy
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 23212
Join Date: Aug 2002
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Vehicle:
2002 Impreza RS

Default

I'm with Brad. Why not VVT or something? Maybe raise the redline on GT spec cars either Legacy or Impreza? Variable length intake runners? Why not something?

And for that matter, why did FHI cheap out on the RS line anyway. I mean dropping the rear LSD. And the 13 mm rear sway bar when the WRX gets a 20?
That Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2003, 06:09 PM   #7
joefocker20
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 13745
Join Date: Dec 2001
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Vehicle:
2004 STI
Silver

Default

Because Subaru was trying to save money and gauge interest on the WRX. I figure, why complain about it, for the same price as a WRX, you can buy a 2001 RS, and mod the hell out of it. The main problem is, trying to find a way to minimize driveline loss, and I have no idea how to do that. If you can build a N/A engine with 230 HP and drop the percentage of driveline loss, it would be an amazing car..
joefocker20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2003, 06:37 PM   #8
Cabal
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 31159
Join Date: Dec 2002
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Austin, TX
Vehicle:
2006 WRX, 2008 2.5i
San Remo Red

Default

Quote:
Originally posted by ImprezaTs
I think Subaru had juiced out the 4 cyclinder more then other car companies did. Is there a NA 4 cyclinder engine that produces more HP then Subarus?
For one, the 2.5L I4 in the Nissan Altimas puts out 175 hp @ 6000 rpm and 180 ft-lbs. @ 4000 rpm on 87 octane. It's not too tough to get the RS there without decreasing reliability, though.
Cabal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2003, 08:28 PM   #9
Penphoe
Friendly Neighbourhood
Moderator
 
Member#: 269
Join Date: Sep 1999
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Vehicle:
2005 ABP LGT LTD BP6
00 Impreza RS GM6 RIP

Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Cabal

For one, the 2.5L I4 in the Nissan Altimas puts out 175 hp @ 6000 rpm and 180 ft-lbs. @ 4000 rpm on 87 octane. It's not too tough to get the RS there without decreasing reliability, though.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that Nissan engine, formerly a "truck" engine before it was stuffed into the Altima? Kind of like what Subaru did with their EJ25 - it's basically a "truck-style" engine for their crossover-SUV's. Low-end grunt in sacrifice for high-end power.

LaterZ!
Darren!!
Penphoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2003, 09:36 PM   #10
Kevin Thomas
Street Racing Instructor
Moderator
 
Member#: 110
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 1997 OBS, 1996 SVX, 1988 RX
Vehicle:
1989 1989 XT6

Lightbulb Re: why not more than 165hp in an RS 97 to 04

Quote:
Originally posted by Brad Pittiful
Ive always wondered why didnt Subaru put more umph in the early RS's... why not 180 to 200 hp since the WRX wasnt being sold here...i tried looking in the archive for a thread on this but couldnt find it there
Probably because a whole lot of Subaru 2.5RS customers weren't asking for more grunt out of the 2.5RS. 'Normal' people were happy with it while the enthusiasts would always add aftermarket parts anyway. People in the later stages of the 2.5RS's life were asking for a more powerful Subaru, the WRX. Subaru delivered and then they are one upping it with the STi.

Again as of late, people aren't asking for more power in the 2.5RS. So........here we are.
Kevin Thomas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2003, 10:17 PM   #11
obyone
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 16523
Join Date: Mar 2002
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Inbetween Hesco's and T-walls
Vehicle:
JDM Maxxpro

Default

180 HP can easily be reached with a header back exhaust.
obyone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2003, 01:28 AM   #12
MattDell
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 16803
Join Date: Mar 2002
Chapter/Region: International
Location: London, England
Default

Hell, just a Cobb intake should get you 180.






-Matt
MattDell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2003, 02:57 AM   #13
Kostamojen
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 2272
Join Date: Sep 2000
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: haha XD
Vehicle:
2013 Subaru 599 :P
Galaxy Blue Sexy

Default

The JDM DOHC EJ25 with AVCS makes 170hp. Yes, I do want to see that engine here
Kostamojen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2003, 03:47 AM   #14
scotty305
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 8877
Join Date: Aug 2001
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: SoCal
Vehicle:
2000 Impreza 2.5RS
(sept '01-jan '04)

Default

www.cobbtuning.com , intake, cams & heads (if you can afford the labor for heads & cams), add hi-flo cat & 2.25" piping, you should be pushing 200hp.

But Subaru doesn't do n/a power, they're a turbo-happy company. Look at the upcoming forester turbo, legacy turbo, etc...

Ever driven a similarly priced honda or toyota? The 2.5RS is no slouch, especially the 98-2001 models, they weighed less.

-scott-
scotty305 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2003, 04:05 AM   #15
joefocker20
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 13745
Join Date: Dec 2001
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Vehicle:
2004 STI
Silver

Default

PM Dcoty, he just had a engine built that should put up 250 HP N/A..
joefocker20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2003, 07:40 AM   #16
ChicksDigWagons
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 20508
Join Date: Jun 2002
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Ishpeming, MI
Vehicle:
1998 Red Wagon
New Turbo Project...

Default

Quote:
Originally posted by That Guy
And for that matter, why did FHI cheap out on the RS line anyway. I mean dropping the rear LSD. And the 13 mm rear sway bar when the WRX gets a 20?
They didn't really cheap out. The 2.5rs used to be the high-end trim package. When they brought the WRX it became the high-end package, and the TS took the place of the previous L. The 2.5RS is not meant to be a performance car anymore so they dropped the performance items. With the heavier chassis the 2.5L was probably needed to get it moving like the 2.2L of yesteryear.

Of course I'm sure they could have squeezed a few more horsepower. Some might say the same about the WRX, why only 227? The Japan model puts down 250.

A big reason is emission standards. I'm sure with a full Cobb servicing, a N/A car wouldn't pass the stringent Federal emission tests (although it may pass a more simple state test.) Another is probably our crappy fuel. Some parts of the country are lucky if they get 89 octane.

That doesn't mean we can't wish though.
-Brad
ChicksDigWagons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2003, 11:40 AM   #17
HndaTch627
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 6551
Join Date: May 2001
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Carol Stream, IL
Vehicle:
'01 GC8 Dinged STM
'09 Concours 14 ABS Black

Default

Quote:
Originally posted by ImprezaTs
I think Subaru had juiced out the 4 cyclinder more then other car companies did. Is there a NA 4 cyclinder engine that produces more HP then Subarus?
B18C5, KA20, B16A1(almost a full litre less displacement and makes 160 HP)
HndaTch627 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2003, 11:47 AM   #18
Brad Pittiful
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 34931
Join Date: Apr 2003
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: A Town Called Malice
Vehicle:
. .
This ain't no picnic!

Default

i guess my main point was....all 2.5 motors got 165hp and the top of the line RS should have gotten alittle more...none the less i still enjoy my RS...thanks for all the info
Brad Pittiful is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2003, 01:18 PM   #19
Penphoe
Friendly Neighbourhood
Moderator
 
Member#: 269
Join Date: Sep 1999
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Vehicle:
2005 ABP LGT LTD BP6
00 Impreza RS GM6 RIP

Default

Quote:
Originally posted by HndaTch627
B18C5, KA20, B16A1(almost a full litre less displacement and makes 160 HP)
But not as much torque.

Different strokes for different folks!

LaterZ!
Darren!!
Penphoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2003, 06:10 PM   #20
JC
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 692
Join Date: Dec 1999
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Vehicle:
2006 Pontiac GTO M6
Triumph Street Triple R

Default

You know the 3.0l H6 fits in an RS...

JC
JC is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2003, 10:12 PM   #21
Brad Pittiful
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 34931
Join Date: Apr 2003
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: A Town Called Malice
Vehicle:
. .
This ain't no picnic!

Default

i dont know about anyone else...but im not looking to swap my engine for more hp but if i were...the STi engine would be what id put in....giddy up!!
Brad Pittiful is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2003, 12:37 AM   #22
HndaTch627
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 6551
Join Date: May 2001
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Carol Stream, IL
Vehicle:
'01 GC8 Dinged STM
'09 Concours 14 ABS Black

Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Penphoe


But not as much torque.

Different strokes for different folks!

LaterZ!
Darren!!
and this all means nothing with a properly geared transmission
HndaTch627 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2003, 06:17 AM   #23
Kevin Thomas
Street Racing Instructor
Moderator
 
Member#: 110
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 1997 OBS, 1996 SVX, 1988 RX
Vehicle:
1989 1989 XT6

Default What

Quote:
Originally posted by JC
You know the 3.0l H6 fits in an RS...

JC
"Whatcha talkin' about Willis?"

How do you know this? Has someone on the board done this and if so who?
Kevin Thomas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2003, 06:49 AM   #24
ChicksDigWagons
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 20508
Join Date: Jun 2002
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Ishpeming, MI
Vehicle:
1998 Red Wagon
New Turbo Project...

Default

You know Kevin, I had a dream about that the other night...scary. I haven't heard of it being done but I'm 100% sure it could be. Hell, I'm sure a EJ33 would fit too with enough finesse. The EZ30 is marginally longer (~20mm). With a some super-low-profile flexalite fans it would fit behind the radiator, and the only thing to worry about would be whether the engine mounts are the same. If not, the cross-member from the H6 Legacy might be a direct bolt on.

Then it's just a matter of completely replacing your wiring harness :-( Whether or not the 90 extra pounds would be a real problem isn't real clear. If you consider the saved weight of turbo components and factor in an aluminum hood and lightweight bumper beam it may not be that huge of a gain.

I wonder if it's been done...
-Brad
ChicksDigWagons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2003, 09:28 AM   #25
NicEJ25
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 26155
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: E. Canada
Location: Levis,qc,ca
Vehicle:
2008 WRX 5dr
Dark Grey

Default

I would love to see an H6 in a impreza. my friend was supposed to do so, but swap a wrx EJ20 instead, because of the higher power potential. and for those asking for more HP for the 2.5 and why subaru didn't do that, there is one answer: low-end power, orTorque. subaru is almost the last japanese manufacturer to offer some kind of torque, considerating the HP. in an "enjoy-driving" point of view, having as much lbs of torque as HP is desirable, is a such way that it give a fully usable powerband. Subaru probably go this way for another reason too, security. subaru is crazy about active and passive security. it's a good thing for us since with better control, you can avoid crash. better control can also mean, be able to accelerate to avoid an obstacle or another car. with good power in midrange, you'll accelerate better without downshifting. one of my schoolmate's mom discover that in a few second. she slided in a 6 inch deep slush lake, accelerated to get out of it. back on dry pavement, a car was coming in front of her, she steer to avoid car and go offroad. the snow wall boarding the road was too hard, her forester front-flipped. the car is now considered scrap. all windows, winshield and trunk glass is broken. she had NOTHING. all this happened at 50 mph or so.
NicEJ25 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
Why are more than half the cars on Autotrader already sold? delongedoug Off-Topic 28 08-13-2009 06:51 PM
U.S. Wind Industry to Break Installation Records; Expand by More Than 35% in 2005 FunkerVogt Political Playground 17 11-06-2005 07:01 PM
why not more super powered N/A Subies? josh...just josh Normally Aspirated Powertrain 42 06-24-2005 10:58 PM
04 STI springs in an RS maxiav Brakes, Steering & Suspension 5 05-20-2004 09:06 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:23 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.