PDA

View Full Version : 2.2 running on a 2.5 Calibration?



Turbodave
04-11-2006, 02:15 PM
I've been running my Voyager on the stock 2.5 SBEC for a little over a year now with an 89 2.2 TII engine under the hood. It runs fine for the most part, gets decent mileage, passes the smog tests etc, but it's always seemed a little wimpy at lower rpms. When the engine hits about 3500rpm it spools up hard and pulls like crazy past 6000rpm, but beneath there it's pretty sluggish.

I'm just using a grainger for boost control, set to 12psi. I have checked the cam timing before and just yesterday replaced the timing belt and I'm now 100% positive the cam timing is on the money.

Being a 90 there aren't a lot of computer options as the only SBEC cars with 2.2's were either VNT's or TIII's. I've got a VNT computer I'm going to try once I wire in a charge temp sensor. I put an adjustable cam sprocket on it yesterday as well, so I may start to play with the cam timing too.

I was just curious how different the 2.5 and 2.2 spark curves are and if that would explain why the van is a pooch down low. Would love to get the powerband to a range more suited to the heavy van.

I'll eventually be putting the 2.5 back in the van, but it's going to be a while before I get it rebuilt, just want to make the best of what I've got in there.

The S is Silent
04-11-2006, 02:21 PM
I can't imagine the 2.2 without low end in the van. My van is running the 88 TII that I got from you over the summer, and it's gutless enough using the 88 2.2 TII cal...it's not terrible, but the 2.5 that was in it was sooooo much more fun (of course it was also running 19 psi, and is part of the reason I'm running a 2.2 now ;) ) BTW, thanks again for that engine...it's running awesome now.

I don't see why a VNT wouldn't work if you are using a grainger for boost control...unless the VNT solenoid not being there put's it into a limp-in mode??? It should have the same spark and fuel curves though, with it being the same exact engine.

Turbodave
04-11-2006, 02:39 PM
Glad that engine worked out for you Matt. Like you said, I'm hoping running the VNT cal won't put it into limp mode. Maybe I'm just expecting too much from a 2.2 in a heavy van....

turbovanmanČ
04-11-2006, 03:55 PM
I don't know the exact specs but I know the 2.2 is more aggressive down low so that would explain why its soft, the 2.5 doesn't have as much. I tried a 2.2 cal in my van and I had to put the base timing at around 4deg, it pinged so badly. Try advancing your base timing 2 deg at a time and listen for knock.

Will Martin
04-11-2006, 03:58 PM
I ran my 2.5 with a 2.2 computer and my 2.2 with a 2.5 computer. You'll have to play with the timing a bit to get it the way you like. If you plan on running any higher boost, you'll have to give it a bit more fuel.

turbo xtc
06-12-2006, 07:12 PM
i'm running a 2.5 with 2.2 electrics i have found out at 13 degrees btdc @13 psi and i had to increase fuel

86Shelby
06-12-2006, 08:55 PM
I tried a 2.2 cal in my van and I had to put the base timing at around 4deg, it pinged so badly.

I had the same experience with my GLHT. The 2.2 spark curve is more agressive than the 2.5 curve.

Whorse
06-12-2006, 09:34 PM
You can buy VNT to TII cals. The VNT does some weird things with boost levels, so you'd need a grainger, and remember it's trying to control vanes, not a wastegate.

iTurbo
06-14-2006, 05:58 PM
I have a friend in town that has a '90 Shadow running an '88 2.2L turbo engine, using the '90 2.5L TI SBEC. It runs decent, can't really complain at all. He had it on the dyno last year and it made 186 WHP with the 2.2L TI, 2.5" exhaust, Mitsu turbo (14 psi), and TII intercooler.

I have been using a OTC scanner on my Shelby Lancer (2.2L TII LM) and Omni GLH (2.5L TI SMEC) and I've noticed that at idle the 2.5 TI SMEC only has 1' advance while my Shelby Lancer is at 12', however both read from 9'-11' at WOT.

MiniMopar
06-14-2006, 07:05 PM
The spark advance is a bit different, but when it is all put together it's only a couple of degrees depending where you are in the band. The biggest difference by far is the fueling. The base fuel curves and the pumping efficiency table will add fuel to the bottom end. The O2 feedback will try to make up for that, overall, but the shape of the curve will still make fuel delivery act funny. The 2.5L pumps more air at the bottom end, but our crappy heads make the 2.2L and 2.5L approach each other at the upper end.

WVRampage
06-21-2006, 02:19 AM
I was running a 2.5 with a 2.2 computer a while back and in the upper rpm range it didnt run real good,so I got a mp 2.5 computer and it got all beter. Its a 88 or 89.