Perth-WRX.com  

Go Back   Perth-WRX.com > Technical > Mechanicals
Register Diddy Kart ArticlesAll AlbumsBlogs FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search


Welcome to Perth-WRX, click here to register!

Like Tree13Likes

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 25-11-2010, 08:38 PM
Rossco's Avatar
Perth WRX Old Skool Cool Dude
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Perf, NOR
Posts: 5,467
Blog Entries: 11
Thanks: 54
Thanked 100 Times in 79 Posts
Rossco is a guruRossco is a guru
Send a message via MSN to Rossco
Default

On another note Gav; I WAS going to assemble my new shortie myself, but I've been offered a deal I can't refuse on all machining, clearencing, modification & short block assembly for <$1k

This will save me time & the possibility of me making a dumb mistake.

My bottom end is then apparently good for 450+ hp at the crank......100 hp plus over my target.
__________________
[CENTER][SIGPIC][/SIGPIC][/CENTER]
[CENTER][COLOR=#ff0000]Built Ej207: Semi-closed RA Cases - Wiseco Forgies - Manley rods - BC 272 cams - GDA Heads - billet f/whl - Vi-pec - WbO2 - 800cc Yellow tops - TD05-20G - 409Hp ath @ 1.75bar on E85[/COLOR][/CENTER]
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 25-11-2010, 08:38 PM
BoxorBeast's Avatar
STI Master
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: in my car
Posts: 679
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 2 Posts
BoxorBeast at standard level
Default

2.1 - 2.5 fails.... well... in my case anyway haha
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 25-11-2010, 08:47 PM
STI325V6's Avatar
Sign me up!
Subaru Tech Division
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Perth, Darch
Posts: 1,932
Thanks: 15
Thanked 41 Times in 30 Posts
STI325V6 knows their stuff
Default

I think Rossco hit the nail on the head, I need to work out my power goals and go from there, plus the fact that the 2.5 needs more $$ to get the reliability...
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 25-11-2010, 08:59 PM
mARC's Avatar
Perth WRX Old Skool Cool Dude
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: In a House
Posts: 3,589
Thanks: 43
Thanked 30 Times in 28 Posts
mARC at standard level
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by STI325V6 View Post
^^Don't get you, do you mean the 2.5's failure rate, or me damaging the car (or myself)
Failure rate, also interested in what are factors are making you lean towards the 2.5.
__________________
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 25-11-2010, 09:08 PM
STI325V6's Avatar
Sign me up!
Subaru Tech Division
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Perth, Darch
Posts: 1,932
Thanks: 15
Thanked 41 Times in 30 Posts
STI325V6 knows their stuff
Default

I guess it is the street driveability and extra torque, however I am aware that the more you push them the more often they fail...
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 25-11-2010, 09:38 PM
Scoobie Noobie
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: PERTH
Posts: 8
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
bigbill at standard level
Default

2.5 can be built tough and be able to rev and make good power as well, can all ways go a 2.35, those extra cubes give the torque to be able to pull us fat sods arounds.....
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 25-11-2010, 09:41 PM
trainwrex's Avatar
Sign me up!
Perth WRX Old Skool Cool Dude
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NOR
Posts: 6,685
Thanks: 2
Thanked 15 Times in 9 Posts
trainwrex at standard level
Default

Gav.

Speak to tony knight.. Guru in my book, let him know ur goals and hell make u a ripper engine..
__________________
I'm a jockey kunts...
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 26-11-2010, 01:23 AM
type25's Avatar
Subaru Tech Division
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: in exile
Posts: 1,371
Thanks: 12
Thanked 12 Times in 12 Posts
type25 at standard level
Default

there should be very little difference in the "rev-ability" of 2.5 and 2.1 litre bottom ends.

they both have the same stroke(79mm/2.5 crank) and rod ratio (unless you are building something out of the ordinary with custom length rods and pistons with altered pin height to suit).

cam and turbo selection would cause a greater variance on "rev-ability" than the bore size difference.
__________________
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 26-11-2010, 09:13 AM
RUSSGT's Avatar
Perth WRX Old Skool Cool Dude
Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Perth
Posts: 4,683
Thanks: 109
Thanked 90 Times in 79 Posts
RUSSGT is a guruRUSSGT is a guru
Default

Can i ask what happened to the current engine? Why not just keep it going untill it dies? Strap a bigger turbo on and enjoy.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 26-11-2010, 11:05 PM
STI325V6's Avatar
Sign me up!
Subaru Tech Division
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Perth, Darch
Posts: 1,932
Thanks: 15
Thanked 41 Times in 30 Posts
STI325V6 knows their stuff
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by type25 View Post
there should be very little difference in the "rev-ability" of 2.5 and 2.1 litre bottom ends.

they both have the same stroke(79mm/2.5 crank) and rod ratio (unless you are building something out of the ordinary with custom length rods and pistons with altered pin height to suit).

cam and turbo selection would cause a greater variance on "rev-ability" than the bore size difference.
Okay, so what would you go for?

I guess the 2.1 would be a stronger set up.

cheers
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
advice, build, engine, requested, so many arrogant cunts.


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
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Trainwrex Engine build back trainwrex General Subaru Discussion 6287 27-03-2017 10:50 PM
Opinions from those that know? engine build.... Rossco Mechanicals 131 21-12-2012 09:01 PM
New Engine Build Questions Qu3xy Mechanicals 44 02-03-2009 07:34 PM
USDM Recalled MY08 Forrester FXT and MY08 WRX STI American Dave General Subaru Discussion 53 14-05-2008 06:23 PM
Running Advice.. (treadmill, not an engine) DAN682 Non-WRX Discussion 34 06-07-2006 04:32 PM



Welcome to Perth-WRX, click here to register!

All times are GMT +8. The time now is 11:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO