Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Tuesday September 2, 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 Subaru Models > Impreza Forum

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 06-24-2001, 04:50 PM   #1
Jessie James
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 2072
Join Date: Aug 2000
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Out of my mind
Question Differences between 2.7 6cyl and 3.0 H6 engine?

Okay, does anyone know what block is used for these two engines? I am looking into buying an XT6 and would like to know the differences in size/weight for the 2.7 6 cylinder engine and the new 3.0 6 cylinder (Outback) engine. Basically, are the motor mounts the same, weight similar, etc.

On that same thought, how do the motor mounts line up for the EJ25 block.

Any thoughts on turbo vs. non-turbo crossmembers as well?

Thanks for your help.


-James

P.S. I will be selling my 2000 RS soon. Let me know if you are interested. I'm in Colorado, now, as well.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Jessie James is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2001, 07:06 PM   #2
jmott
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 6713
Join Date: May 2001
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Houston TX USA
Vehicle:
2007 Prius
brown

Default

.3 liters
jmott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2001, 07:12 PM   #3
Jessie James
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 2072
Join Date: Aug 2000
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Out of my mind
Default

Haha.

Anyone who actually has a clue care to post?
Jessie James is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2001, 08:11 PM   #4
motorob
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 2878
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Nuevo Mexico, usa
Vehicle:
06 Evo IX MR

Default

Because of the age difference between these motors, I would guess that they share nothing. I expect that the 3.0 is a "clean-sheet of paper" design. I don't really know though. Maybe you could go to your dealer's parts dept. and check something basic, like the part #s for the block cases, that would give you a basic idea.
motorob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2001, 08:21 PM   #5
anotherB4
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 6120
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Tokyo
Vehicle:
BE5B AVOed B4-RSK
Sorta White

Thumbs up

Give that man a cigar!!

The new 3.0 is a clean sheet design - much lighter and shorter than previous designs. It is only 20mm longer than the EJ20!! Did I hear better emissions - yep, you'd be right there too.

But can it be safely turboed?? Have yet to hear anything about that.

Added this: And sorry, but I know zippo about the 2.7. 3.3 owners may have something to add on the SVX forum though...

Cheers.

Last edited by anotherB4; 06-24-2001 at 08:32 PM.
anotherB4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2001, 10:59 PM   #6
wagman01
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 3894
Join Date: Jan 2001
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Royal Oak, MI
Vehicle:
2002 WRX Wagon
Battlewagon Black

Default i agree

the 2.7 and the 3.0 have probably NOTHING in common, short of the same number of cylinders. I doubt it even has much in common with the 3.3... but who knows.

And why didn't they just use the SVX 3.3 instead of paying for all the R&D of a new one? the world may never know...
wagman01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2001, 11:33 PM   #7
ralyrcr
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 1769
Join Date: Jun 2000
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Madison, WI USA
Vehicle:
2006 Pontiac GTO
2009 Forester

Default

ok, well i know something about all this mess.

The 2.7 flat six motor is the same style block as the old 1.8 found in pre 98 imprezas and in the old loyal, GL, DL, and xt cars from the mid eighties up. the 2.7 is just the 1.8 plus two cyl. of the same bore and stroke, the motors are the same compression. 1.8 litres / 4 cyl. =.45 litre per cyl, times 6 cyl. = 2.7 litres humm, the 2.7 is just the 1.8 with two more cyl. slaped on the end.

The case is similar with the 3.3 found in the svx. it is just a 2.2 with 2 more cyl slaped on, same bore and stroke, just higher compression pistons are in the 3.3 which brings the 3.3 s compression to a cool 10:1, by the way you can put these pistons in to the 2.2 block, and it will result in the same 10:1 compression as the 3.3 has, no need for any head or block work, the pistons are directly swapable. Again 2.2 litres / 4 cyl. = .55 litre per cyl. times 6 cyl = 3.3 litres, humm once again.

The 2.7 motor is runs the same style running gear as the 1.8, distributor ignition, same coil, same injectors, same oil pump, same everything. The 3.3 had some fancy runing gear which differenciats it from the 2.2, like the direct coil ignition where every cyl. has its own coil that sits directly above the spark plug, but the 3.3 has the same style block, nothing new or fancy in the internals.

The new 3.0 motor is an entirlet new design. its realitivly high compression, very thin cyl walls, fancy intake manifold with daul stage runners, fancy variable back preasure exhst , and chain for the cams in place of a belt. this motor is a very different beast from the 2.0, 2.2, or 2.5 motors that came before it. As to the reason why subaru didn't use the 3.3, the main reason i can see is room. the 3.3l motor is something like 4.2 inches longer than the 2.5, where as the new 3.0 is a slim one inch longer, and its still a thigh fit. also the new 3.0 motor is in a lot of ways better that the old 3.3, the torque curve is much better on the new motor. basically the 3.3 is a sport tourer motor, where as the new 3.0 is a lot closer to an actual truck motor. but thats all opinion, i just know clearence would have been very close with the 3.3 in the legacy platform.

hope i didn't ramble too much
cool, later

jon
ralyrcr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2001, 12:49 AM   #8
anotherB4
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 6120
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Tokyo
Vehicle:
BE5B AVOed B4-RSK
Sorta White

Thumbs up

Good one Jon,

Caught me writing similar stuff re the EZ30.

As above, the really nice things are the length - less than an inch longer than the 2.0 and weight. The 3.0 is also quite a deal better on emissions than any of the 4 cyl engines - and gets the better tax status for that in Japan.

I can add that they went for a new design rather than slapping 2 pistons on the EJ because of balance issues - the top engineers are trying to keep the low CG and minimise the front heaviness that increased capacity can bring along to the party. The turbo legacys are carrying a lot of plumbing that hangs out front - and losing that sort of weight cannot be bad! Makers of lightweight transfer pipes and headers are doing well because many drivers are looking for better turn in as well as response gains.

Natch, emissions are becoming a bigger issue all the time, and the FHI boys were feeling that the EJ is getting near its limits. Can't wait to see a 4 cyl version - it'll be tiny, and light.

Cheers.
anotherB4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2001, 01:41 AM   #9
XT6Wagon
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 524
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: WA
Vehicle:
04 STi
White

Default

Ok, The 2.7L is DERIVED from the EA-82 and is called the ER-27. It however is also the test bed for many of the features on the EJ series. It's a very tough motor, but you need to watch the cars you get as they eat headgaskets and heads if overheated. This is due to the POS radiators that die after 10 years or so. some people have removed a radiator to look at it and a 1/4 of the fins simply fall out after all this time.

I have been told that the ER-27 uses 550cc/min injectors, and the stock fuel pump is a bit over 30 GPH. That should be good for well over 200HP stock, but fuel rails and the pump might need looked at to go higher. The heads suck as far as design goes, but a turbo will solve the flow problems, and atleast one person has fitted a same style head with solid lifters. The short stroke and 1.75:1 R/S ratio means it can crank the RPMS, but its limited by stock flow to well under the mechanical limits. The cams are the most agressive I've heard of for the pre-EJ cars, and should not need upgrading unless you want a REAL wild high RPM screamer. The motor is also light, with a under 200lbs dry wieght. I Would guess its about 175lbs. The EJ series seems to hit the scales at around 150-160. The real stinker of the whole ER-27 setup past the heads is that it still uses the old style trannies. It looks like that the guts from a later tranny might go in, but I have never heard of someone doing so. Still they seem to survive a fair ammount of power, and the open center diff goes along way in keeping the gears intact. The syncros are not unbreakable however, and many hard drivenones need them not long after 100K miles.

I know alot less about the EZ-30, but for right now I would skip it. They will be expensive, and unkown if they can be used for performance applications w/o extensive work. You will also need to get a legacy tranny for this motor. You might contact the people with WRX swaps in the loyale/leone series to find out driveshaft and 1/2 shaft issues. You may be happy on the motor mount issue as it looks like a EJ/EZ will sit right in and have the proper spacing for the tranny. The EJ and later engines have the bellhousing built into the block and is thinner than the bolt on one for the EA/ER ones.

Last I don't know if the Turbo crossmember from a XT or turbo loyale (85-89 DL,GL,GL-10,RX,RS) will bolt up. Subaru used different rails in the side of the engine bay, and the crossmember is unique to the XT6. Custom motor mounts would be needed in anycase, as the turbos use the small square mounts, while the XT6 uses the large round legacy style mounts.

Anything else I might know?
XT6Wagon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2001, 04:09 AM   #10
ralyrcr
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 1769
Join Date: Jun 2000
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Madison, WI USA
Vehicle:
2006 Pontiac GTO
2009 Forester

Default

xt6wagon is right on the issue of radiators, my 89 xt6 rad was missing over half the fins when i repaced it, however i did replace it whit a turbo radiator. it required new mounts, and new placment of the wholes for the fans to screw in., but over all it wasn't too hard to do. just drilled some holes, and welded some new nuts on the rad. it kept the car much cooler.

jon
ralyrcr 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
Is there a definitive answer on difference between 2.5 sti and non sti engine? BEEZSTI Newbies & FAQs 11 07-14-2006 02:57 PM
WTB: 3.0 H6 engine redgrocerygetter Private 'Wanted' Classifieds 13 06-15-2006 07:15 PM
Differences between 2.5 RS and WRX Luminescent General Community 7 05-13-2004 10:15 AM
NA 2.5, H4 and 3.0, H6 Alpha1 News & Rumors 19 06-02-2003 04:39 PM
Upgrade parts for 3.0 H6 engine? anders8 Outback Forum 1 05-12-2003 08:09 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:33 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.