Fantasy Build time: Spec me an 2.33 ..-engine only
but expensive servers and sh*t will bring in better money than what breweries could give you 
09 January 2005, 05:30 PM
#32
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Leeds - It was 562.4bhp@28psi on Optimax, How much closer to 600 with race fuel and a bigger turbo?
Posts: 15,239
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I dunno.. all my money seems to go to the breweries... 
I dont do bad at all for my age.. just expensive debts..
David
I dont do bad at all for my age.. just expensive debts..
David
10 January 2005, 01:36 PM
#38
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,881
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oops how did that happen... lolAuthorised Advertiser Tag applied for (before the mods zap me
)If I was going down the fantasy engine build route I would go for a really revvy engine, as near to square bore and stroke that is possible, standard bore pistons and monster stroker crank
And some lightweight, superstrong valves and valve gear etc.
10 January 2005, 06:01 PM
#40
Conrad:
Would that be a 2.3 then?
Will a 2.3 rev Sti style, ie 8K?
Has anyone actually bought a Ravenscroft USA 2.3 and run it with a vengence?
If a 'moderate' 2.5 = 400x400 output then a 2.3 is ?x? using the same externals, ie
TD 05 20g
Walbro / 550cc
Gruppe S headers
De-cat 3''
Apexi FC + Anndy f mapping
Sti 8 TMIC
Optimax + NF
? Any comments?
Glad you started this Chrome, but I do like Dyney's approach.
911
Would that be a 2.3 then?
Will a 2.3 rev Sti style, ie 8K?
Has anyone actually bought a Ravenscroft USA 2.3 and run it with a vengence?
If a 'moderate' 2.5 = 400x400 output then a 2.3 is ?x? using the same externals, ie
TD 05 20g
Walbro / 550cc
Gruppe S headers
De-cat 3''
Apexi FC + Anndy f mapping
Sti 8 TMIC
Optimax + NF
? Any comments?
Glad you started this Chrome, but I do like Dyney's approach.
911
10 January 2005, 06:23 PM
#41
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Aberdeenshire
Posts: 2,139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I myself is swayed to this EJ257 as a get up and go block( I was without a licence for a year then had the car a little over a week before failure and i miss driven it 
) until i have the crawford 2.2.
) until i have the crawford 2.2.
10 January 2005, 06:50 PM
#42
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,881
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 911
Conrad:
Would that be a 2.3 then?
Will a 2.3 rev Sti style, ie 8K?
Has anyone actually bought a Ravenscroft USA 2.3 and run it with a vengence?
If a 'moderate' 2.5 = 400x400 output then a 2.3 is ?x? using the same externals, ie
TD 05 20g
Walbro / 550cc
Gruppe S headers
De-cat 3''
Apexi FC + Anndy f mapping
Sti 8 TMIC
Optimax + NF
? Any comments?
Glad you started this Chrome, but I do like Dyney's approach.
911
Would that be a 2.3 then?
Will a 2.3 rev Sti style, ie 8K?
Has anyone actually bought a Ravenscroft USA 2.3 and run it with a vengence?
If a 'moderate' 2.5 = 400x400 output then a 2.3 is ?x? using the same externals, ie
TD 05 20g
Walbro / 550cc
Gruppe S headers
De-cat 3''
Apexi FC + Anndy f mapping
Sti 8 TMIC
Optimax + NF
? Any comments?
Glad you started this Chrome, but I do like Dyney's approach.
911
)You only need to look at AndyF's and Trout's engines, both less than 2.5 litre and both have very respectable results.
If the componants (pistons, rods & crank) are lightweight and strong they will be happy at revs above 8K. Dont forget your valve train will also need to be able to cope with the high revs.
My factory Ducati twins rev to 12,000 rpm reliably and they are huge 100mm pistons but the rods are Ti, the valves are Ti and the rockers are all lightweight. You only need to look at modern bike engines to see what is possible, various inline four engines revving to 16000 rpm. Car engines are definitely lagging behind.
Last edited by The Fixer; 11 January 2005 at 10:54 AM. Reason: Cos I'm disylexic - 97 cjanged to 79 - Thanks for pointing that out mark
10 January 2005, 09:33 PM
#43
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 1999
Location: SSO2003 2nd, SSO2005 1st, SSO2006 2nd, TACC Rd4 5th 4wd: In my car ;-)
Posts: 2,637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Conrad,
Now that WOULD be a MONSTER stroked crank !!!
Mark.
monster stroke crank (i.e larger than the 97mm 2.5 one)
Mark.
10 January 2005, 09:53 PM
#44
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: All over the place, trying to stop putting the miles on!
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Forgive my ignorance but why is square engine geometry so good when it comes to bore/stroke ratio??
Dan.
Dan.
Last edited by Danny Boy; 10 January 2005 at 10:10 PM.
10 January 2005, 11:57 PM
#45
Subaru Tuning Specialist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 7.74 @179 mph 1/4 mile - road legal
Posts: 6,654
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Having done the 'monster bhp' thing with the 2.3 I think you seriously need to ask yourself what you want from the car ?
If it's for racing on track then fair enough, go for a revvy custom built 2.3 but if it is for a fast tractable road car (and I mean FAST) then go the 2.5 400/400 route.
On the majority of roads a 400/400 set up would be uncatchable, even the 550+bhp 2.3's would have trouble keeping with one as they try to 4 wheel-spin themselves off the road every time you go WOT under 100mph
Then of course you tend to drive the big bhp engines with one eye on the coolant temp, oil pressure, boost, knocklink etc.
My advice is don't think you need 500+ to get a thrill ! Go try a 400/400 2.5, it's a completely different animal to a 400bhp 2.0 !
Andy
thing with the 2.3 I think you seriously need to ask yourself what you want from the car ?If it's for racing on track then fair enough, go for a revvy custom built 2.3 but if it is for a fast tractable road car (and I mean FAST) then go the 2.5 400/400 route.
On the majority of roads a 400/400 set up would be uncatchable, even the 550+bhp 2.3's would have trouble keeping with one as they try to 4 wheel-spin themselves off the road every time you go WOT under 100mph
Then of course you tend to drive the big bhp engines with one eye on the coolant temp, oil pressure, boost, knocklink etc.My advice is don't think you need 500+ to get a thrill ! Go try a 400/400 2.5, it's a completely different animal to a 400bhp 2.0 !
Andy
11 January 2005, 12:26 AM
#47
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 5,285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
interesting info! - thanks Conrad/Andy.
Andy- I think if Im honest- a *fast* road car is what I want.
Needs to be blindingly fast mind
I only drag it now and again to let off a bit of steam and have some fun... no way can i compete with you guys, and the more hardcore Sti based cars out there.. not until I can afford to insure one fully comp anyway also im too scared of really breaking somethign critical as its my only car
Graham- Dyney's approach is also interesting and something I have been advised is really worthwhile pursuing also..
The 2.33 question was just the little devil on my shoulder prodding me to ask about it
A rev limit of 8K+ would certainly be mad
maybe better for emptier roads up north (york rural area for example) tho than around here
Andy- I think if Im honest- a *fast* road car is what I want.
Needs to be blindingly fast mind
I only drag it now and again to let off a bit of steam and have some fun... no way can i compete with you guys, and the more hardcore Sti based cars out there.. not until I can afford to insure one fully comp anyway
also im too scared of really breaking somethign critical as its my only car Graham- Dyney's approach is also interesting and something I have been advised is really worthwhile pursuing also..
The 2.33 question was just the little devil on my shoulder prodding me to ask about it
A rev limit of 8K+ would certainly be mad
maybe better for emptier roads up north (york rural area for example
) tho than around here
11 January 2005, 06:49 AM
#48
During a hill climb that 8000 limit is certainly used! And the rev limiter is felt very often.
However, the engine needs to be very torquey to get out of the tight bends fast.
The stock 2.5 route is very practical:
Short block done and dusted and cheap.
Add Roger Clark oil pump
Add an Sti v3 or later classic engine (if you've got one already )
Add the externals, all bolt-on (great if you've got them already )
Add a 6 speeder ( not so good!)
Still looking at £4K!
I can imagine an Impreza chassis on a hill climb with 450+ being over whelmed in hard driving.
Think Andy is on the right track (so to speak) with a 2.5 x 400/400 x Dyney!
911
However, the engine needs to be very torquey to get out of the tight bends fast.
The stock 2.5 route is very practical:
Short block done and dusted and cheap.
Add Roger Clark oil pump
Add an Sti v3 or later classic engine (if you've got one already
)Add the externals, all bolt-on (great if you've got them already
)Add a 6 speeder ( not so good!)
Still looking at £4K!
I can imagine an Impreza chassis on a hill climb with 450+ being over whelmed in hard driving.
Think Andy is on the right track (so to speak) with a 2.5 x 400/400 x Dyney!
911
11 January 2005, 10:01 AM
#49
Subaru Tuning Specialist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 7.74 @179 mph 1/4 mile - road legal
Posts: 6,654
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Some time ago, John Banks and I had a little side by side test session (strictly controlled on our own private track ) His engine spec was almost identical to mine, both approx 400bhp.
John had his MY00 UK with a 2.5ltr fmic, induction, exhaust, 20G
I had a Sti5 type R 2.0ltr fmic, induction, exhaust, 20G (theoretical advantage on gearing, weight and rev limit)
Regardless of what speed or rpm we hit the throttle, John instantly pulled 2-3 car lengths on me and held that distance, every roundabout or tight bend and he was off again ! Even when I cheated during the roll on tests (building boost against the brake ) he still pulled away !
Andy
) His engine spec was almost identical to mine, both approx 400bhp.John had his MY00 UK with a 2.5ltr fmic, induction, exhaust, 20G
I had a Sti5 type R 2.0ltr fmic, induction, exhaust, 20G (theoretical advantage on gearing, weight and rev limit)
Regardless of what speed or rpm we hit the throttle, John instantly pulled 2-3 car lengths on me and held that distance, every roundabout or tight bend and he was off again ! Even when I cheated during the roll on tests (building boost against the brake
) he still pulled away !Andy
11 January 2005, 10:34 AM
#50
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Leeds - It was 562.4bhp@28psi on Optimax, How much closer to 600 with race fuel and a bigger turbo?
Posts: 15,239
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Its not like you to cheat andy!
So do you wish you'd built a 2.5 instead of a 2.33??
So do you wish you'd built a 2.5 instead of a 2.33??
11 January 2005, 12:29 PM
#52
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 5,285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Andy.F
Some time ago, John Banks and I had a little side by side test session (strictly controlled on our own private track ) His engine spec was almost identical to mine, both approx 400bhp.
John had his MY00 UK with a 2.5ltr fmic, induction, exhaust, 20G
I had a Sti5 type R 2.0ltr fmic, induction, exhaust, 20G (theoretical advantage on gearing, weight and rev limit)
Regardless of what speed or rpm we hit the throttle, John instantly pulled 2-3 car lengths on me and held that distance, every roundabout or tight bend and he was off again ! Even when I cheated during the roll on tests (building boost against the brake ) he still pulled away !
Andy
) His engine spec was almost identical to mine, both approx 400bhp.John had his MY00 UK with a 2.5ltr fmic, induction, exhaust, 20G
I had a Sti5 type R 2.0ltr fmic, induction, exhaust, 20G (theoretical advantage on gearing, weight and rev limit)
Regardless of what speed or rpm we hit the throttle, John instantly pulled 2-3 car lengths on me and held that distance, every roundabout or tight bend and he was off again ! Even when I cheated during the roll on tests (building boost against the brake
) he still pulled away !Andy
With my own car; the only clearly obvious differences to JB are the 2.5 and turbo (P450?) .. (my own turbo is a 20G, but a little one).
Not in anyway having a go at your (incredible) drag times btw Andy.
It sounds like a 2.5 is generally more suited to the 'torque' type of driving I do.
(altho Pavlo is obviously chasing you with his 2.5 on the strip)
now to start putting some funds aside for a Sti type UK box.. or maybe the PPG kit? need to do some serious searching on here and 22b when I get an hour or three
Last edited by chrome; 11 January 2005 at 12:33 PM.
11 January 2005, 01:51 PM
#56
Subaru Tuning Specialist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 7.74 @179 mph 1/4 mile - road legal
Posts: 6,654
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by David_Wallis
Its not like you to cheat andy!
So do you wish you'd built a 2.5 instead of a 2.33??
So do you wish you'd built a 2.5 instead of a 2.33??
No not really ! As I said earlier, if someone wants a really fast reliable car that is VERY enjoyable to drive and will run in the 11 sec 1/4's then go for the 400/400 spec EJ257 2.5.If you want to scare yourself, can drive with an eye on the gauges, don't mind a bit of maintenance, have a second car to clock up the high miles, have a bit more (read lot more) money to spend and want to run 10's then go for the CDB 2.33
I think the Sti5/6 box will stand 400/400 ok, it's substantially stronger than the UK of that year.
Andy
11 January 2005, 04:32 PM
#58
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 7,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
andy, what about a CDB 2.5?
serious question.
ps. so do you think I am doing the right thing by going from gt35R to gt30R and dropping from 550 to 450, or possibly 400?
ps. I need you to explain something to me offline when you get the chance.
serious question.
ps. so do you think I am doing the right thing by going from gt35R to gt30R and dropping from 550 to 450, or possibly 400?
ps. I need you to explain something to me offline when you get the chance.
11 January 2005, 06:18 PM
#59
Scooby Regular
I think the Sti5/6 box will stand 400/400 ok, it's substantially stronger than the UK of that year.
Andy[/QUOTE]
Do sti4 boxes have the same internals as the 5/6's?
Andy[/QUOTE]
Do sti4 boxes have the same internals as the 5/6's?
11 January 2005, 07:16 PM
#60
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,881
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Adam M
andy, what about a CDB 2.5?
serious question.
ps. so do you think I am doing the right thing by going from gt35R to gt30R and dropping from 550 to 450, or possibly 400?
ps. I need you to explain something to me offline when you get the chance.
serious question.
ps. so do you think I am doing the right thing by going from gt35R to gt30R and dropping from 550 to 450, or possibly 400?
ps. I need you to explain something to me offline when you get the chance.
Adam
, why go to all the trouble of building a spectacular engine that produces over 550 HP and then de-tune it??? Did you not think for one second when you originally specced a 500+ turbo it would be too much for the road? I would leave it as it is and learn to drive properly, not a dig at you by the way but going on a high performance driving course would be a great way to reap the benefits and enjoy what you have created.