Skip to main content

@Stan Galat posted:

"If you wanna' play, you gotta' pay".

I have been talking to my Subie tech more than once over the years for what I would consider a best option should I ever need an engine rebuid.  

If I was building again from scratch a subie 6 cyl is expensive to do but great torque for 60 more lbs of weight.  In a Ghia no issue, in a 356 more work but doable.  A 6cyl can be done but they are not cheap to rebuild either and a subie trans bolts right up without issues.  Of course an Atom Link is what would be done for ECU.

I would contemplate a 4 cyl as well in a forged piston NA setup with more goodies to get a 200hp engine but in reality a stock ECU is by far an easier route for the newbie who wants to turn the key and go experience or have 10000 mechanics at his disposal, anywhere.  

Since I have been talking to my Subie tech more than once over the years for what I would consider a best fit, they continue to come back to say a 4cyl turbo setup is the best bang for any buck with the possibility of getting the least turbo lag with the right setup.

So you do have to pay to play but then with low mileage that is driven in this car get what you want or what your budget allows.  The subie route is by far the most cost effective way without the P tax but then if you drive the car so little then get a P drivetrain your cost will not be out of this world unless you get a mishap.

Just saying.

@DannyP posted:

I'll address your points one by one.

1. It's not impossible, but it will be very expensive to get 220 hp out of a  NA Subie.

2. I didn't say the compression can't be raised. I said it can't be raised MUCH. And static means nothing. Dynamic is what I'm talking. Remove some combustion chamber volume, it goes up. Add lift and duration and it comes back down. Dynamically, I'll bet the stock and super-modified engines are pretty close. That is how I'm running 10.2:1 static in a 2165cc aircooled engine on 93/10 on the street.

3. 10% of 165hp is 16.5, or in the vicinity of where Lane's car is. Yes, 10% isn't that hard. It's when you're looking for 20% or 30% or even 33%(55 + 165 = 220) that I start to get doubtful. A 1/3 power increase on an already very well-tuned NA car is not impossible, it's just improbable.

4. An aftermarket ECU is indeed the key, as are intake, cam, head, and exhaust mods. All of them together, there is no free lunch and/or one bolt-on item that will give you 1/3 more. It's just expertise and MONEY.

Show me the dyno sheet, with all parameters listed(baro, humidity, correction factors) and with both HP and torque curves, like my man Stan says. Otherwise, it's just conjecture.

True statements Danny, EJ Engines range of Hp and torque ... say the stock ECU gives you 165 to 170hp if you tuned the stock ECU with a custom tune and had better exhaust headers and better flow air intake ie K&N you might get 2-5hp extra, maybe in California that would translate to 10hp more ... could be achieved.  

Attachments

Images (2)
  • mceclip0
  • mceclip1

I’m probably the only person on this site to have owned a Spyder with a stock EJ25 engine and stock ECU and also a Spyder with Outfront “200”hp EJ25 with built heads and Stinger ECU. My new car does have a LSD and a better shifter. But I can tell you from the seat of the pants. There is absolutely no comparison in the performance of these 2 vehicles. My new car would smoke my old car. I was told by the builder of my first engine to just put 87 octane in the car since with a stock ECU there would be no difference in performance between regular and high test. Of course I tried premium and could never tell the difference. Obviously there’s no difference in displacement between these two engines. Difference has to be compression and ECU tuning. I know the argument for going all stock. But I’ve been there. Done that. My new car screams. I’m just not interested in stock. Also not interested in forced induction.

@DannyP is absolutely right to point out the difference between static and dynamic compression. I had the Panchitos cut for 9:1 and have been running high test.

During the recent (hospital) unpleasantness, I sold the lawnmower and engaged a lawn service since the grass NEVER stops growing here.

Out of curiosity, I poured 5 gallons of 87 octane left over from my mowing days into an almost empty tank. I figured I could top it off (12.5 gallon tank) with 93 if it knocked.

100 miles later with some full throttle attempts, I haven't gotten it to knock yet. The real test will be to take it up the mountain, but so far so good.

I suspect I could have cut the heads a bit more.

.

Damn, absolutely nothing interesting to read on the forum today for those of us who are perfectly happy with a mild-mannered 2-liter type 1.

I guess it's true what they say about power corrupting.

I will say that on a corduroy road (and most interesting roads around here are), I already have enough power to find the limits of the suspension.

I hope those of you with unnaturally aspirated aspirations also aspire to working on the undercarriage a bit.

.

@550 Phil posted:

I’m probably the only person on this site to have owned a Spyder with a stock EJ25 engine and stock ECU and also a Spyder with Outfront “200”hp EJ25 with built heads and Stinger ECU. My new car does have a LSD and a better shifter. But I can tell you from the seat of the pants. There is absolutely no comparison in the performance of these 2 vehicles. My new car would smoke my old car. I was told by the builder of my first engine to just put 87 octane in the car since with a stock ECU there would be no difference in performance between regular and high test. Of course I tried premium and could never tell the difference. Obviously there’s no difference in displacement between these two engines. Difference has to be compression and ECU tuning. I know the argument for going all stock. But I’ve been there. Done that. My new car screams. I’m just not interested in stock. Also not interested in forced induction.

We were not trying to disparage your build or any on here that have opted for a NA with a bit more oomph.

I also agree that your experience is different Phil, as you compared two engines and when building from new it makes sense to add some discretionary spending to get a solid 200hp engine and an ECU curve that makes the car more responsive as they can even change the Drivebywire throttle response that would give you more seat of the pants inertia.  I am happy, that your happy with it, truly.   Personally, I don't like forced induction either and with 175hp NA in my car it is hard to justify just doing a 10K upgrade for 25 hp unless the engine requires it which it does not at this time... the madness could get me though.

Two years ago I ordered a turbo Subaru engine Intermeccanica from Henry. I had the engine built using ALL new parts including every nut and bolt, Subaru ICU with a Cobb tuner and few additional aftermarket performance parts.

When the car was completed I had it shipped to Calgary and the engine tuned and broken in by the engine builder on his Dyno Dynamics dynamometer. My understanding that DD dynos give the most conservative hp results of all dynos.  They got it up to 262 hp at the wheels and backed it off to 252 for a flatter curve.

Transmission is a Subaru 5 speed.

This car has been driven 2000+ kilometres and the engine has been performing perfectly with no problems. The car is very drivable and I have no regrets.

.

@550 Phil posted:

.

...Some of the best driving of the year. Particularly today. No one on the road. Glorious. Long drive. Belly full. Great day...



Here, too.

Can now drive anytime in the middle of the day, without top of head frying.

Have been enjoying not having any particular place to go and taking my time getting there.

This engine definitely likes 60 degrees better than 80 degrees.

Like a puppy likes puddles.

.

Add Reply

Post Content
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×