The OFFICIAL H-6 into an FFR 818 thread......

[Turboguy]

Hey guys-


Rather than hi-jacking or derailing other threads, why don't we use this new thread to pose our questions, and share our knowledge regarding installing a flat-6 into FFR's new 818.





I'll start the ball rolling -- does anyone have dimensions for the EG33 engine that powered the SVX?



Also, is the new 3.6L H-6 based on the same block as Subaru's new 3.0L H6?

[Turboguy]

For those looking to whet their H-6 appetite, here's a sound clip of a Porsche 911 powered by a EG33 flat-6 out of a late 90's Subaru SVX:





Music!

[flynntuna]

It's been said that the 6cyl won't fit , but that is with the fuel tank between the engine and the seats. relocating the gas tank to the front should give plenty of room.

[bbjones121]

I don't think it is worth trying to fit the H6 into this car. Way overkill. If you want torque, stroke the 2.5, if you want horsepower, get a larger turbo. Everyone knows how to tune the H4, you could probably get one online for the 818. There would be absolutely no reason to go through the trouble of fitting the H6 into the 818. Just because it could probably be done, doesn't make it a smart thing to do.

[Turboguy]

It's been said that the 6cyl won't fit, but that is with the fuel tank between the engine and the seats...

I've read in many places that the new EZ30 is only 0.75" longer than the 2.5L turbo four in the 'rex. I do not know the dimensions of the older EG33.

I don't think it is worth trying to fit the H6 into this car. Way overkill. Blah, blah, blah

Thank you for the input, but this thread isn't about should we or shouldn't we - it's more about "is this possible" and "what options would work". Those of us intrigued by going this route have our reasons why we're here

WRX motors can do lots things -- but can they sound like a flat-6?




NOW- back to our regularly scheduled programming.

Here is a clip of a newer EZ30 that was transplanted into a Porsche 914:

[mug23]

Stroking the 2.5 motor will cost almost as much as the 818 kit itself and you still need to get the correct turbo size for that motor and that will run the cost up even more. Fitting the H6 will cost much less and still get the torque and almost instant throttle response. Building the H6 up to rev up to 8.5K rpm will sure provide that sexy exhaust tone that the 4 cannot provide.

[Canadian818]

I had the same trouble in my twin turbo thread, lots of people saying it was pointless. But thats the internet for ya, for every 9 worthless posters there's one willing to help.

I have no interest in doing the H6, however i'll help brainstorm.

What are the factory output numbers on the H6's?
How many variations are there of subaru H6's? Just the EZ30 and EG33? If so, what vehicals did they come in?
Was either H6 ever mounted to a manual transmission? If not, will any subaru trannies work?


Until someone has a 818 to measure off of, we won't know for sure. But i'm confident that it can be made to fit. There might be enough room to move the entire assembly back an inch and run the driveshafts at more of an angle or custom shafts. While undesireable, it might be possible to move up an inch for clearance. Gas tanks are easy enough to modify or relocate so i wouldn't worry to much about that. No doubt there will be compromises though.

It boggles my mind how people can't wrap their head around modifying a kit car. EXAMPLE: The STI transmission isn't supported....so what! Someone with enough determination will find a way to make it 2wd, and someone else will find away to make it look pretty hanging out past the bumper. And if we're supportive in their endevour, they might even share the info with us! Imagine!

[JRach]

EG33- Front of the crank pulley to the back of the bellhousing is 24" (which is 6" longer than the ej205/ej255/ej257)

[Matty_STi]

The new large displacement h6 (EZ3.6D) come with offset connecting rods, probably be crazy expensive to get custom offset/asymmetrical forged rods made. The other EZ series engines have one exhaust port per cylinder, again not so great. Micah (homemadewrx and of 3MI fame) says the EG is the way to go for high HP in the H6. If we are talking in the 200-350whp then yeah any h6 is fine, but if higher rpms or big hp numbers are the game then the EJ H4s or EG H6's are the way to do it. Keep in mind you want to run an H6 to 8k-9k you are going to need to do some serious valvetrain work and also crank, piston and rod work, which will get reaaaaaallly expensive really fast as the market for those parts is so small, in other words you are looking at one off custom pieces and all the woes that come with trying to get the tolerances right for all those pieces especially if you don't pay out the nose up front.

I love the idea of high HP high revving H6 but man that seems like a lot of work. But like I have said before I am probably (depends on final cost versus a built ej257) going to drop a built EG33 in my sti, may also try to do a variable vane holset turbo that I have hybrided with EFR parts, and looking for 600-700 at the wheels with minimal lag daily driver (though I am not remise at playing with the ez30r, dunno it's winter and I have time to look at dollars and cents). I may end up putting an H6 in my 818, or, blergh, too many options!!!

Just my 2 cents.

Matt

[Matty_STi]

I had the same trouble in my twin turbo thread, lots of people saying it was pointless. But thats the internet for ya, for every 9 worthless posters there's one willing to help.

I have no interest in doing the H6, however i'll help brainstorm.

What are the factory output numbers on the H6's?
How many variations are there of subaru H6's? Just the EZ30 and EG33? If so, what vehicals did they come in?
Was either H6 ever mounted to a manual transmission? If not, will any subaru trannies work?


Until someone has a 818 to measure off of, we won't know for sure. But i'm confident that it can be made to fit. There might be enough room to move the entire assembly back an inch and run the driveshafts at more of an angle or custom shafts. While undesireable, it might be possible to move up an inch for clearance. Gas tanks are easy enough to modify or relocate so i wouldn't worry to much about that. No doubt there will be compromises though.

It boggles my mind how people can't wrap their head around modifying a kit car. EXAMPLE: The STI transmission isn't supported....so what! Someone with enough determination will find a way to make it 2wd, and someone else will find away to make it look pretty hanging out past the bumper. And if we're supportive in their endevour, they might even share the info with us! Imagine!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Subaru_engines -> helpful link for those looking.

Trannys should all be fairly easy to mate with different engines. Don't often hear of people having issues. The STi tranny isn't easy enough to make into a 2wd tranny (because of more complicated internals, dccd). There also is the problem that the tranny weighs more. I am sure if you contacted quaife or ppg (gearbox folks not the paint folks) or KAPS they could do something to help, possibly even cosworth. Gonna pay through the nose with any of those options. Could always give em a shout and see what they say, or call up or email andrewtech http://www.andrewtechautomotive.com/

[Desertrunner]

Hi guys,
we all talk SVX here,

which should help you with the back ground on the EG,

http://www.subaru-svx.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=62

If you check out some of the projects we are working on you will see the dry sump for the EG33.
also I will ask my mate Bazza to jump in he might be able to give you a clearer understanding of the plus and minus of the different engines.

Tony

[Matty_STi]

whoops double post..



I guess I will add. H6's are heavier, by like 100lbs or so.. this is supposed to be a light weight car. You could always stroke out the 257 to 2.7L

[bbjones121]

Sorry, don't get me wrong, I owned a 1993 Anniversary SVX. I loved it, the way it holds the road at high speed, the few style changes you could do to make it look exotic, and the fact that you could have the windows down in the rain... Once my second tranny was going out from overheating, I decided it was time to move on. I almost purchased a Toyota or Honda until I test drove a used 2006 Legacy GT. I was always in love with Subaru's, the engineers actually design for maintenance, which you don't get very often.

If you are going to go H6, I would definitely get the SVX 3.3. The EG is a much stronger engine than the newer EZ 6 engines. If I remember correctly, it was a prototype/experiment into the 6 cylinder world. They had twin turbos and 5/6spds built and ready to sell in 93 or 94, but due to low sales in 92, ended up scrapping them. I only wish there was a way to get a hold of one of those prototype twin turbos, but I read that they were destroyed.

I think that the only reason Perrin probably made the H6 turbo was to prove they could. It probably had severe longevity issues.

Tuning these cars once they are built will be the trick and there are much more H4 tuners around, but I am sure they would love to jump on the opportunity to be the first to tune an H6 in the 818.

[bbjones121]

Hi guys,
we all talk SVX here,

which should help you with the back ground on the EG,

http://www.subaru-svx.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=62

I use to be on subaru-svx.net a lot.

[bbjones121]

Here is a good sight for SVX parts:
http://svx-motorsport-accessories.st...net/index.html

[Movieman]

I don't think it is worth trying to fit the H6 into this car. Way overkill. If you want torque, stroke the 2.5, if you want horsepower, get a larger turbo. Everyone knows how to tune the H4, you could probably get one online for the 818. There would be absolutely no reason to go through the trouble of fitting the H6 into the 818. Just because it could probably be done, doesn't make it a smart thing to do.

Things like this get done because in one mans mind he says "What if" and goes from there.
It is what drives innovation and also proves the mistakes we can make but in the end we all learn from that one mans drive and vision.
I remember back in 1977 having this little 2600cc V6 1973 Mercury capri, liking the body lines but just wishing it had some more "stones"
142HP at the flywheel, 107HP at the rear wheels..
Dropping in a V8 was out of the question, doable but with a lot of $$ and fabrication.
Turbo's were very new then, just the Turbo 911 Porsche if I remember and that was $25,000.00 back then..BIG money.
Short version, $1700.00 later 15 lbs of boost, 275HP at the rear wheels on a chassis dyno and a little sleeper of a beast.
If I'd listened to my friends I wouldn't have done it.
Sometimes you just have to listen to your heart.

[skullandbones]

^^ I agree you should not stiffle innovation. Some ideas are good and should be tried and some should stay in your head. A small group of young hot rodders (me included) decided to get together and build a drag car for exhibition. Well, the great idea was a detuned Allison engine in an Anglia. Oh well, there turned out to be so many reasons that wouldn't work, we eventually gave up! But compared to that, the H6 doesn't seem to be so bad of an idea (not making fun). We're talking pretty small deminsions to overcome and there are a lot of potential benefits. The only bad thing is the $ and availability for a big build. I think those rods would be big bucks and the labor unless you could do it yourself or had a very good friend who is a machinist would be substantial. But a mildly built one might even be practical with mostly OEM stuff (as practical as this hobby gets). IMO, WEK.

[NonProfit]

OK, I'm a wet blanket but i'm here to help you...

Factory Five got some high praise because the Hot Rod takes four different motors and either a standard or automatic tras.

Yet the physical dimensions of the H-6, the STIs 6-speed and the Subie automatic, although within a few inches, remain are unapproved. Certainly in the development process, it seems a trivial matter to extend the chassis, nudge the firewall forward, or even flare the rear body panels to ensure the needed clearance. But they did not do this, even after receiving accolades for this same line of thinking with the 33.

So, I wonder if it's not about size but weight. A Porsche 912 handles much better than a 911 from the same era, as the six adds an extra 300lbs over the back axle which adversely affects handling.

Am I nuts?

[Mechie3]

I had the same trouble in my twin turbo thread, lots of people saying it was pointless. It boggles my mind how people can't wrap their head around modifying a kit car.

It's not that we (me included) couldn't wrap our minds around it, it's that a lot of us aren't new to Subarus and have been modifying them, racing them, and building engines for years and have seen these things come and go many times. For the goals you stated, a TT would have been money spent for no benefit other than being different.

Trannys should all be fairly easy to mate with different engines.

They should bolt right up without much issue. EG's will work fine with stock ECU, newer ones don't play nice with manuals out of the box.

I guess I will add. H6's are heavier, by like 100lbs or so.. this is supposed to be a light weight car.

Depending on the model, some were only 50lbs heavier IIRC. The EG33 used a timing belt, the newer EZ's use a timing chaing (part of the reason it's shorter front to back and more compact).

If you are going to go H6, I would definitely get the SVX 3.3. The EG is a much stronger engine than the newer EZ 6 engines. If I remember correctly, it was a prototype/experiment into the 6 cylinder world.

The EG33 was not their first H6. They had previously made the ER27 in the late 80's which was based on the EA82. The EG33 itself was based on the EJ22 with 2 addition cylinders on the back.

^^ I agree you should not stiffle innovation... The only bad thing is the $ and availability for a big build. I think those rods would be big bucks and the labor unless you could do it yourself or had a very good friend who is a machinist would be substantial.

Agree. I'm not trying to stifle innovation with my comments. I'm an engineer for a living. Most of my job starts at one point: What is the problem? Lots of money is spent by companies solving problems, but a lot of companies don't properly identify problems and thus solve symptoms, but don't find root cause. If someone says "I must go TT or must go H6 to get my hp goal", they've predefined a solution to a problem without identifying the problem. If they state "i want 300 hp", there are much easier, much cheaper, less time consuming options that work just as well. Now, if the problem statement was "I want to sound like a porsche 911", then yes, the H4 will not work. If the problem statement is "I want to be different", then yes, the H6 or TT will do that.

I like innovation, I like seeing new things done. I do believe, though, that all innovation must be done with a historical perspective, seeing what has already been done, why it worked, why it failed, how to improve, how much it cost, etc.

For Fun:

Here is an EG33 in a porsche:
http://www.precisionchassisworks.com...che-911sc.html

Here is Nasioc's H6 resource thread lots of info there (grantd, some of it focuses on fitting into impreza chassis, but much more info there as well):
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=1323800

Perrin H6 STI build thread (much more involved than their blog):
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=1187722

Not H6 related, but a Subaru motor into a Beetle (will need to create an account to see this) which might also give some insight into swapability, etc.
http://indianaimpreza.com/showthread...ghlight=beetle

[PhyrraM]

Crossbar about an inch in front of the EJ crank pulley.

EG33 (SVX 3.3) is likely a serious "no-go" at 4" longer.

The newer EZ (3.0/3.6) series will likely ft with a bend or dimple in the crossbar.

I, personally, would not totally remove the bar on non-showcar without fully exploring the implications on structural integrity. There are a lot of CAD hours on the chassis, so not much is likely to be 'extra'.

[slopoke]

Does anyone have photos of the EG33, EZ30, and the EZ36 that they can post so they can be compared to one another?

[Mechie3]

For the ez36 woth offset rods, you can see how they compare dimensionally to BRZ/FRS/FA20 rods that are offset. Companies are already making forged rods for those applications.

[Xusia]

OK, I'm a wet blanket but i'm here to help you...

Factory Five got some high praise because the Hot Rod takes four different motors and either a standard or automatic tras.

Yet the physical dimensions of the H-6, the STIs 6-speed and the Subie automatic, although within a few inches, remain are unapproved. Certainly in the development process, it seems a trivial matter to extend the chassis, nudge the firewall forward, or even flare the rear body panels to ensure the needed clearance. But they did not do this, even after receiving accolades for this same line of thinking with the 33.

So, I wonder if it's not about size but weight. A Porsche 912 handles much better than a 911 from the same era, as the six adds an extra 300lbs over the back axle which adversely affects handling.

Am I nuts?

I don't think your reasoning or logic is nuts. From the outside, it seems perfectly sound! In reasoning through the same thing, I came to the conclusion its really about the project's stated design goals, most notably $9900 and a single donor. While I have no way of knowing, I'd bet one of the primary goals for the 33 Rod was to allow a large degree of customization, since that is part and parcel to such a vehicle. We already know there are other issues with STi beside the transmisison size. Not that they can't be overcome, but would doing so jeopardize the $9900 price or the project as a whole (running out of time and/or money to actually deliver a project - remember, at some point, all projects have to pay off for them or they can't stay in business). We also know the EZ H6's have issues with manual transmissions (at least in the US), and the EG's are older which means that while they are a great engine, they probably aren't a viable long term platform upon which to base a product I assume they hope to sell for years.

So if I sum all that up, I think it makes sense from a business perspective to keep the design costs low (even if that limits donor options) in order to meet the design goals and get the product launched successfully and ON TIME. Afterward, you can fold in other things. <-- and if you look at both FFR's history with the other models, AND what Dave has stated, I think you'll agree there is a good chance support for the STi transmission (and possibly even as a single donor) and use of the EX series H6 (perhaps even with an automatic) are likely to come at some future point.

Therefore, I don't fault them for these omissions, even though I personally wish they were included.

[PhyrraM]

The 95" wheelbase was chosen very early in the design. This is currently the most limiting factor, but being that it is one of the first chosen "hard" criteria makes it almost unmovable at later stages.

Also consider that the the original location for the fuel tank was proposed to be under the seats. The community was very scared that FFR couldn't make the car look "right" if the seats were that "high", so FFR moved it. (I'll make the point that the same community also said that Jim's version of the 818 would never be able to look "HoF" or even good.) If we were just able to leave the FFR team alone, that fuel tank location with a 95" wheelbase would have left tons of room for the H6s.


Edit: that sounded like an "I told you so". It wasn't meant to, just more of an "Ah-ha".

[bobzdar]

It's not that we (me included) couldn't wrap our minds around it, it's that a lot of us aren't new to Subarus and have been modifying them, racing them, and building engines for years and have seen these things come and go many times. For the goals you stated, a TT would have been money spent for no benefit other than being different.

Well, there's throttle response and predictability as well. Having driven both turbocharged and high revving NA motors, I vastly prefer the NA motor, especially in a competition environment (road course). Yes, you can get there with a turbo 4, but I'd much rather do it with an NA motor. If the NA 6 fits and makes significantly more power than an NA 4, that's the direction I would go. In a heartbeat. Despite what people say, I have yet to drive a turbo motor that has no turbo lag, especially at part throttle with light throttle modulations. You can work around that, but for a fun track car, I'd rather have a proper NA motor and give up a little weight and power to be able to drive the thing properly. Were I actually racing, give me the power and I'll drive around the lag and throttle response issues, but that's a different deal and would depend on the rules. So for me, if I want to really drive the car at the limit, it has to have a decently sensitive throttle. I have some trouble with this on my f355 as it has ITB's and it's sometimes tough to get light throttle tip-in after coming off the brakes. The engine vacuum holds the throttle blades shut and you have to push harder than normal to break the vacuum so it's tough to give it just a little throttle mid-corner. Turbo lag is worse, as you can give it a little throttle, but then it's not quite a enough so you give it a little more, but then the boost comes on and it's too much so you end up getting all herky jerky on corner exit or just holding it and sliding around the turn. That can make for an entertaining ride, but not so good for lap times or tires and may be a little tricky to keep on track in a very light, mid engined car.

[STeeL25T]

I have spare EG33 block and heads in my garage I can go measure if that would help anyone. They aren't bolted together, though.

For those asking for pictures, here's my block engine after getting hot tanked, milled, balanced etc. and put back together with Eagle rods and custom CP 8.5:1 pistons.



This is my built motor for those asking for pics of the engine.





You can also bolt that intake manifold on backwards if you need the throttle bodies in the front. Don't know if that would help on this swap or not.

[Xusia]

This is exactly what I'm talking about: Drive-ability. I've dealt with nearly the exact same issues with high powered motorcycles (though not caused by a turbo), and I don't care for it. Predictable and smooth throttle response is far more important to me than all out HP (and, at least for me, more fun too!).

Another benefit I thought of in regards to using the H6 is that the lack of an inter-cooler would leave more space available for a trunk. I'm actually pretty excited by that!

[Mechie3]

Well, there's throttle response and predictability as well. Having driven both turbocharged and high revving NA motors, I vastly prefer the NA motor, especially in a competition environment (road course). Yes, you can get there with a turbo 4, but I'd much rather do it with an NA motor.

They key, though, to my statement was "for the [power] goals stated". IIRC, 300hp was the original stated goal. My 2.5L with a stock wrx turbo had a flat powerband of 312hp from 3200 to 5500 rpms and lots of low end torque. Though I haven't road raced, my closest comparison for lag is autocross. There were 1 or 2 really small courses that made this a problem on 1 or 2 corners. In general, the turbo was small enough and the motor big enough I didn't have problems.

My current DD is a 2.0L wrx with a VF39 (STI Turbo, I bought it that way). The lag kills me. It came witha super loud exhaust (since changed) that was obnoxious. It was embarassing for a minivan to keep up with me on an on ramp up to 4k rpms. Once I hit 4k, goodbye, but up until then I was glad for the window tinting hiding me. lol

My current autocross car uses a CVT so the motor is always at 8800 rpms and I can certainly appreciate instant response. It's hard to compare directly to my wrx since the autocross car weights only 725lbs (with me in it). It's also a short wheelbase (72") so when power does come on it tends to kick out the back end.

If the newer H6's are only .7" longer, you could always reweld the engine and trans mounts back set slightly. The axles could certainly handle that much off axis shift.

[BrandonDrums]

The shot PhyrraM posted makes it looks like there could be really really low clearance between the front of the 4cyl and the chassis judging by the latest shots. I did find this pic which shows the engine bay from the front - It's hard to tell but it looks like there could be a bit more space up there. I wish we could find a full-on side shot of the engine bay showing the clearance between the engine and firewall bars.



If it turns out there isn't enough room as is to shoehorn a 6cyl in there, judging by the shot below I think the easiest thing is pulling the engine and tranny mounts back an inch and stick with the EZ30/30R/36R which is closer to just 1'' longer than the EJ 4's.

Here, you can see there's enough room to slide the whole engine/transmission back about an inch without having the half shafts risk striking the crossbar but you might need to lower the trans a tad by getting a thinner trans mounting bushing or raising the engine mounts some to ensure there's room for the axle to angle up when the suspension compresses. The trans mount tab actually looks like it's long enough as-is to just drill new holes and reinforce it a bit to move the tranny back an inch, I need to find a better shot of the engine mounting points to see what type of play there is.

[Desertrunner]

Well, there's throttle response and predictability as well. Having driven both turbocharged and high revving NA motors, I vastly prefer the NA motor, especially in a competition environment (road course). Yes, you can get there with a turbo 4, but I'd much rather do it with an NA motor. If the NA 6 fits and makes significantly more power than an NA 4, that's the direction I would go. In a heartbeat. Despite what people say, I have yet to drive a turbo motor that has no turbo lag, especially at part throttle with light throttle modulations. You can work around that, but for a fun track car, I'd rather have a proper NA motor and give up a little weight and power to be able to drive the thing properly. Were I actually racing, give me the power and I'll drive around the lag and throttle response issues, but that's a different deal and would depend on the rules. So for me, if I want to really drive the car at the limit, it has to have a decently sensitive throttle. I have some trouble with this on my f355 as it has ITB's and it's sometimes tough to get light throttle tip-in after coming off the brakes. The engine vacuum holds the throttle blades shut and you have to push harder than normal to break the vacuum so it's tough to give it just a little throttle mid-corner. Turbo lag is worse, as you can give it a little throttle, but then it's not quite a enough so you give it a little more, but then the boost comes on and it's too much so you end up getting all herky jerky on corner exit or just holding it and sliding around the turn. That can make for an entertaining ride, but not so good for lap times or tires and may be a little tricky to keep on track in a very light, mid engined car.

I totally agree, I also beleive that if you can get your NA engine to develop power through a torque band, 5K to 10k then you aren't changing gear every 5 secs. When you watch a video of the turbo car on a track from inside it just seems to behave different to a NA high rev car. NA cars seems to corner neater and hold there line better.

We are spending a heap of money and time to get a SVX engine to run at 10,000rpm at which it should develop close to 400hp engine. So I ask which would you rather a 400hp NA or a 400hp turbo.

Great topic guys.

Tony

[Xusia]

So I ask which would you rather a 400hp NA or a 400hp turbo.

HP being equal, I can't think of a single reason that's important to me that would cause me to want the turbo...

[Mechie3]

Depends on the size of the motor with the turbo and what the power bands look like. As much as I like turbo cars I hate power bands where you get nothing until 4k rpms.

[bbjones121]

HP being equal, I can't think of a single reason that's important to me that would cause me to want the turbo...

I can think of two very big reasons to go turbo. Altitude and gas mileage.

[Xusia]

I can think of two very big reasons to go turbo. Altitude and gas mileage.

HP being equal, I can't think of a single reason that's important to me that would cause me to want the turbo...

I live basically at sea level and as I mentioned in another post, anything is improvement over the 13mpg I get in my truck. Any fuel economy loss (compared to a turbo) is a small price to pay for the throttle response and torque curve I want.

[PhyrraM]

Personally, I think a bone stock 256HP/247TQ 3.6 liter H6 mixed with a manual transmission with the tallest final drive I can figure out how to get in a Subaru (currently 3.7:1 in a 1990-1994 Legacy FWD 5speed) is the perfect combo for a street driven 818.

[Xusia]

You think as I do!!!

[Thorne]

They key, though, to my statement was "for the [power] goals stated". IIRC, 300hp was the original stated goal. My 2.5L with a stock wrx turbo had a flat powerband of 312hp from 3200 to 5500 rpms and lots of low end torque. Though I haven't road raced, my closest comparison for lag is autocross. There were 1 or 2 really small courses that made this a problem on 1 or 2 corners. In general, the turbo was small enough and the motor big enough I didn't have problems.

My current DD is a 2.0L wrx with a VF39 (STI Turbo, I bought it that way). The lag kills me. It came witha super loud exhaust (since changed) that was obnoxious. It was embarassing for a minivan to keep up with me on an on ramp up to 4k rpms. Once I hit 4k, goodbye, but up until then I was glad for the window tinting hiding me. lol

My current autocross car uses a CVT so the motor is always at 8800 rpms and I can certainly appreciate instant response. It's hard to compare directly to my wrx since the autocross car weights only 725lbs (with me in it). It's also a short wheelbase (72") so when power does come on it tends to kick out the back end.

If the newer H6's are only .7" longer, you could always reweld the engine and trans mounts back set slightly. The axles could certainly handle that much off axis shift.

I previously owned a vf39 2.0.. you are making more tq sooner then a stock wrx. Just saying and if you getting beat because of rpm SHIFT GEARS.

[bbjones121]

I think this comes down to learning how to drive a turbocharged vehicle. I think it is kinda fun to play with the lag, egg people on by staying right with them and then waving goodbye as you control the boost. You learn to push the clutch in slightly, ramp of the RPM's, then bye bye whenever you want. If you ride with someone that knows how to control a turbo car, you would be surprised what it can do. I think that is what makes it fun, it isn't just a lazy push your foot to the floor and go, it takes some major learning.

I think the H6 would sound great in this car, but this car is a tuned sports car, it isn't your muscle car. To me, it needs to have the whooshing sound as the turbo spools, and I personally would want to dump my wastegate straight to atmosphere so you leave people wondering what in the world just happened.

Make a statement, This is a race car!!!!

[el_jefe]

High compression motor + small turbo(s) = quick throttle response. My thought is to put a couple small turbo's on an EZ30, and have boost settings for DD (300hp), track (400hp), and ohmygodimgonnaDIE (500 hp). Add some meth injection for the high hp settings and done.

[Xusia]

I think this comes down to learning how to drive a turbocharged vehicle. I think it is kinda fun to play with the lag, egg people on by staying right with them and then waving goodbye as you control the boost. You learn to push the clutch in slightly, ramp of the RPM's, then bye bye whenever you want. If you ride with someone that knows how to control a turbo car, you would be surprised what it can do. I think that is what makes it fun, it isn't just a lazy push your foot to the floor and go, it takes some major learning.

I think the H6 would sound great in this car, but this car is a tuned sports car, it isn't your muscle car. To me, it needs to have the whooshing sound as the turbo spools, and I personally would want to dump my wastegate straight to atmosphere so you leave people wondering what in the world just happened.

Make a statement, This is a race car!!!!

You like turbos. I get it. I don't. Different strokes for different folks. We CAN peacefully coexist, can't we?

[SOAPBOX]
I'd like to make a request: That those not interested in the H6 stop trying to preach the merits of the almighty turbo in this thread (which is supposed to be about the viability of the H6 in the 818). Those of us interested in H6 have our reasons for wanting it - whatever they may be. Isn't that enough? The CEO of Subaru himself could show up with a Nobel prize winning engineer and deliver a 4 hour presentation on the merits of turbo charging and why the H6 is not as good, and I'd STILL want an H6 over the turbo H4. That's just me. PLEASE accept me as I am, and not how you'd like me to be!
[/SOAPBOX]

P.S. YES, I'm a bit of a smart @ss, and YES that was meant to be funny, but also to politely make a serious request. Thank you.