What engine do I want for my 818R? grrrrrr.

[PhyrraM]

Why the EJ22T?

The semi-closed decks motors are arguably just as strong.
They are more supported (pistons, rings, cranks) because of the 'odd' bore size and the #3 thrust position.
Power potential is greater with an EJ25 sized bore, regardless of chosen stroke length.
2.0 bore fits 2.0 heads better than 2.2 bore. Same goes for 2.5 bore and heads. 2.2 only ever got SOHC heads (outside of the oddball 22B cars, which had EJ20K heads)

10 years ago, I could make an argument for an EJ22T build. But now, with the semi-closed decks available, the best argument is nostalgia.



Disclaimer...I am hoarding 4 EJ22T blocks ATM. I am a first gen Legacy guy, and for me IT IS nostalgia. Not all of my Legacies will use them, but at least one will "because that's where they belong". I have built, and love, an "old school EJ2.35" using the 2.2 block/bore and a 2.5 stroke/crank. If I was to build it again, it would be a "new school EJ23" using a 2.5 bore and a 2.0 stroke. I'm hoping that the perception that they are better than newer blocks holds until I can sell them for a complete STI/LGT (basically AVCS) conversion for one of my first gen Legacies.

[ddavisart]

Ive had a couple of built suby's and currently drive a built wrx hybrid (2.5shortblock with 2.0 heads) making 415/450 at the wheels. These engines are great and have alot of potential, but I would have to always give the nod to the 2.5. Its the better engine if money isnt an option. The lag difference like some of the others mentioned is pretty big between the 2.0 and 2.5. 2.5 feels better through the power range and the added torque makes a huge difference. For instance the 2.0L we had in the car made 260/220 at the wheels on the dyno with a turbo that would see spool around 3800-3900 rpms. Same turbo and setup on my 2.5L made 280/300 at the wheels and saw spool around 3300rpms. Car felt night and day different from the added torque and the reduced lag. Just more fun to drive. Now this is on a wrx around 3,000lbs not a 1800lb car, but just something to think about. If you want more power go with the 2.5. It has the potential to last longer from the lower revs, feel better for daily driving or tight tracks, and push a stronger powerband with less effort( less boost, longer life). All that being said a 1800lb car is going to fly no matter what you put in it, but personally if I had the money to spend the 2.5 would be my choice.

[Oppenheimer]

it most definitely does take more time im probably one of the very few if any other people who are college students building one of these lol i owned 4 wrxs and just wanted something different and i figure for what i could buy an STi for and set up for the track setup i want i could very easily have built an 818 which is most definitely going to be unique and in my opinion a lot more fun there was an ej22t long block with around 120k miles for sale on nasioc a couple months ago that someone was selling for 600 plus shipping probably should have bought it kinda regret that now

Do they teach punctuation in college these days? I mean, I get all the gramatical liberties taken in the name of efficiency and saving keystrokes, but would it kill you to throw in a period or comma every now and then?

Get off my lawn!

</GrumpyOldManModeOff>

[blueoval_bowtie_guy]

Do they teach punctuation in college these days? I mean, I get all the gramatical liberties taken in the name of efficiency and saving keystrokes, but would it kill you to throw in a period or comma every now and then?

Get off my lawn!

</GrumpyOldManModeOff>

I can't even read stuff like that.

[Xusia]

I'm with you Opp! I find posts like that:

1. Difficult to read
2. All too common

Seriously NOT trying or wanting to pick on ANYONE. Rather, asking internet peoples to use periods (you can forego commas, capitalization, etc.). Seriously, JUST periods at the ends of sentences would make your posts easier to read!

[Evan78]

Do they teach punctuation in college these days? I mean, I get all the gramatical liberties taken in the name of efficiency and saving keystrokes, but would it kill you to throw in a period or comma every now and then?

Get off my lawn!

</GrumpyOldManModeOff>

LOL, I have the same thought all the time.

[BrandonDrums]

I'd say go with the EJ207. I think it will be a better engine for the 818. It's a better engine overall than the 2.5L turbos for several reasons except power potential. You can still make fantastic power with a EJ207 but you'll do it more linearly, arguably more reliably than the EJ257 and for less money into the longblock.

There's a reason Subaru is going back to 2.0L engines on the new FA platform. For the dimensions of the engine block that Subaru uses, 2.0L has a much better optimized geometry for the bottom end for power delivery, smoothness and reliability. The cylinders are too short to stroke it and bore it to 2.5L, it makes the setup akin to riding a bike with a long crank and the seat set too low.

The 2.5L is great but can break itself more easily thanks to the low rod to bore ratio, it's not as well equipped for sustained high revs under high load without making some upgrades to the internals - namely stronger pistons and opening up the rod-bearing clearance a little more to allow more oil flow. The extreme angles of the rods on the 2.5L make the forces on the bearings and rings higher than what a Corvette Zr1 engine sees at peak torque and that's on a STOCK STI tune.

Then again, shed 1,500 lbs off of what the engine is moving around and none of those issues will matter nearly as much as on a AWD 3300 sedan. Try to find a good JDM EJ207 if you can. Otherwise I wouldn't sweat too much as long as you have something in good shape or can afford a rebuild with quality components at a reputable machine shop.

[wleehendrick]

There's a reason Subaru is going back to 2.0L engines on the new FA platform.

Yes, but it's most likely fuel economy. Nearly all car makers are going to 2 liter, or smaller, fours as their base engine to meet CAFE standards.

[Silvertop]

I can't even read stuff like that.

I actually quit reading this fellow's stuff. Made me crazy.

Which is too bad, because he actually does have some worthwhile stuff to say.

[papajon1000]

Sorry Brandon but wleehendrick is right. Subaru made the change back to the 2.0 liter because of CAFE standards and emissions.

[philly15]

Do they teach punctuation in college these days? I mean, I get all the gramatical liberties taken in the name of efficiency and saving keystrokes, but would it kill you to throw in a period or comma every now and then?

Get off my lawn!

</GrumpyOldManModeOff>

lol im not majoring in that so no

[philly15]

Disclaimer...I am hoarding 4 EJ22T blocks ATM. I am a first gen Legacy guy, and for me IT IS nostalgia. Not all of my Legacies will use them, but at least one will "because that's where they belong". I have built, and love, an "old school EJ2.35" using the 2.2 block/bore and a 2.5 stroke/crank. If I was to build it again, it would be a "new school EJ23" using a 2.5 bore and a 2.0 stroke. I'm hoping that the perception that they are better than newer blocks holds until I can sell them for a complete STI/LGT (basically AVCS) conversion for one of my first gen Legacies.

so what are the chances of parting with one of said ej22's

[philly15]

I'd say go with the EJ207. I think it will be a better engine for the 818. It's a better engine overall than the 2.5L turbos for several reasons except power potential. You can still make fantastic power with a EJ207 but you'll do it more linearly, arguably more reliably than the EJ257 and for less money into the longblock.

There's a reason Subaru is going back to 2.0L engines on the new FA platform. For the dimensions of the engine block that Subaru uses, 2.0L has a much better optimized geometry for the bottom end for power delivery, smoothness and reliability. The cylinders are too short to stroke it and bore it to 2.5L, it makes the setup akin to riding a bike with a long crank and the seat set too low.

The 2.5L is great but can break itself more easily thanks to the low rod to bore ratio, it's not as well equipped for sustained high revs under high load without making some upgrades to the internals - namely stronger pistons and opening up the rod-bearing clearance a little more to allow more oil flow. The extreme angles of the rods on the 2.5L make the forces on the bearings and rings higher than what a Corvette Zr1 engine sees at peak torque and that's on a STOCK STI tune.

Then again, shed 1,500 lbs off of what the engine is moving around and none of those issues will matter nearly as much as on a AWD 3300 sedan. Try to find a good JDM EJ207 if you can. Otherwise I wouldn't sweat too much as long as you have something in good shape or can afford a rebuild with quality components at a reputable machine shop.

the other nice thing is that subaru switched to the dual avcs on both the intake and exhaust as well as once direct injection is used, you almost dont need the extra half liter. as the direct injection is much more efficient and allows you to run more advanced timing. as stated above the 2.0 already has much better geometry. those all combined it will be much easier to create more power quickly and efficiently as well as meet emission standards i am also curious to see if subaru does in fact use the rumored electronically controlled turbocharger in there new line in order to control turbo lag very exciting stuff coming in the near future! cant wait till 2015!!

[Evan78]

I can't wait until the next generation 2.5L turbo engine comes out

[PhyrraM]

so what are the chances of parting with one of said ej22's

I have a complete 2005 Legacy GT harness, ECU (including matching key, security box, and antenna), engine harness, throttle pedal, cluster, and throttlebody as a base to build off of.

As (sort of) mentioned, I need a set of EJ255/257 AVCS heads, intake manifold, fuel rails/injectors, sensors and intake/vacuum/PCV plumbing. I don't really know what heads will have the same AVCS actuators as a 2005 Legacy GT harness (I've always assumed all the USDM are compatible).

I figure the shortblock, turbo, and intercooler will be personal preference and outside of the actual 'AVCS conversion' (and also slightly dependent on the intake manifold chosen).

Seems a bit much for one EJ22T shortblock, but PM me if it's something you wish to discuss.

[Turboguy]

I've got a headache.

[Nuul]

That would be cool if they released the FA20 crate motors, and we knew it would fit right.

You can get a built FA short block from Crawford Performance but it's pricey.

[RM1SepEx]

I'm sure that everyone realizes that there is no "right" answer... Just like almost every other technical topic regarding these cars it is an individual thing... needs, wants, desires... and when racing... RULES and those don't exist yet! I'm sure that the rules will figure greatly into any decision...

[C.Plavan]

I'm still leaning ej20. I like revs, from a stock motor. I too now have a headache.

[Frank818]

(My personal opinion is that more torque will just translate to more tire spin, and will not actually help with forward momentum much).

I tend to disagree on that, not in a bad sense dude, just cuz I view it from a different angle. I mean, I think we're all right, but I don't think wheel spin is a matter of torque only. I don't think you meant "only" torque here, but what I mean is that both ways, a torquey 2.5 or a violent turbo kick in 2.0 will both generate wheel spin.

Example:

- You have a moded 2.0 which produces 350whp, turbo kicks in full at 4000 (or so?) in order to achieve that output. Since you are at med/high rpm and turbo kicks in rapidly due to the increased rpm, it can generate wheel spin and most probably will. Talking 2WD here! My Corrado does that even in 3rd gear on Extreme Performance tires. But I managed to reduce almost to nill in 3rd.
- On the other end, you have a torquier 2.5 which also achieves 350whp, but (usually) requires less boost to do it, so you use a smaller turbo for its displacement, so it hits full boost earlier on the power band and less violently, which tends to generate less wheel spin. But since you got more torque, you may get the same amount of wheel spin in both configurations.

The key to all this is to manage your wheel spin. My friend Mr Logic, first name being Race, is known to be pretty good at that.

My personal opinion is that I'd rather have a torquey 2.5 and manage wheel spin in low/mid rpms with Race Logic rather than having the need to hit high rpms to get the torque output I need on the streets (not talking tracking here). If I am at 2500 I don't want to downshift to 4500 in order to smoke someone. I want it to launch right away.

Since a car with low/mid torque is more practical to drive on the roads than a high rev engine, I'd better go down that route (above).

Like someone said somewhere else it's personal taste, but going back to the wheel spin topic, with traction control you can control torque and wheel spin. Whether you have a 2.0 or 2.5, 200whp or 500whp, the actual goal is to get maximum traction from 800rpm up to redline. Now if you wheel spin from 1000rpm to redline, maybe you got a too big engine. lolll But still you'd be at max traction everywhere if you control it.

Does a 2.0 will wheel spin at 2500rpm in the 818? Maybe, maybe not, that's the unknown for me (that's why I don't know which configuration yet I'll use), I don't know enough about subaru engines to guess on that. All I'm saying is best is to reach maximum traction in the rpm band you want to use. Ultimately everyone wants that.

[flytosail]

That would be cool if they released the FA20 crate motors, and we knew it would fit right.

Rough guess on a price for this?

[Nuul]

Rough guess on a price for this?

I've not found a place that sells a crate for it or even the long block. I was able to piece together some of it from a parts catalog though it's super expensive to do it that way. It's $2200 from Toyota for the shortblock, another $1500 per head plus injectors, etc, etc. No less than $7K but probably way more.

[Xusia]

Hi Frank,

With the addition of traction control to control wheel spin, and given your goals, I think a motor with more low end torque is exactly what you want. I wrote that before we (the forum as a whole) were more versed in the benefits and affordability of traction control. I have a 2.0L, albeit a fairly well built one, and I am on the group buy for traction control. So I'm definitely agree with you on that.

My original statement is true though. Without traction control, it is easier to control wheel spin on such a light car when there is less torque. The troublesome boost you talk about is not present unless the engine has been modified. To me, this means you have control over that. At sane power levels a good tuner can control troublesome boost. Get beyond a certain point, however, and of course you will have problems in this area - it's a natural side effect of pushing this engine design to higher HP using a turbo. But then again, put insane amounts of power in anything (again, w/o traction control), and you are GOING to have trouble controlling the power output - regardless of engine size, configuration, turbo or not, etc. I know this from firsthand experience, and it's one of the reasons I'm such a fan of traction control.

Oh, and WELCOME to the forum!

[Evan78]

I agree with Frank. I've been wanting to make the same point for a while. In the absence of a traction control system, your only control is careful throttle application. It is a lot easier to find the limit when power comes on in a linear, predicable manner. So, I think it is more important to consider the relationship between throttle position and power as well as the torque curve. I find a small engine with a steep jump in power much harder to drive than a bigger, more powerful engine that is more linear, even though that bigger engine is capable of more wheelspin.

[Frank818]

Yes, good one Xusia and Evan.

Of course there are other factors that can help, like a good LSD (mostly for corners) and taller gears. There too comes a point you can't do much, you could have a 1st gear so tall its max speed at 7000 could be 150mph, but you're not going to be faster than a Toyota Yaris, I guess. lolll

Again I'll check those Lotus videos, get traction control, get a good well balanced mildly moded engine and probably I'll have a lot of scary moments driving it.

[Frank818]

In the absence of a traction control system, your only control is careful throttle application. It is a lot easier to find the limit when power comes on in a linear, predicable manner. So, I think it is more important to consider the relationship between throttle position and power as well as the torque curve. I find a small engine with a steep jump in power much harder to drive than a bigger, more powerful engine that is more linear.

That is exactly what I do on my VW. I know exactly when boost will kick in so what I do is I floor it down and then I slightly lift it up to reduce the torque kick and prevent spin. The engine is a 2.8L, but it's hard to drive when it switches from the no boost to full boost bands (though that's what I was aiming for when I started that project). I want to avoid that as much as I can (considering I want more power than OEM) with the 818.

Linear torque curve is much easier to control, yes.