PDA

View Full Version : 2.2 or 2.5 now thats the question



TeddyZ
12-25-2005, 04:51 AM
Im debating on what to go with for my Omni.2.2. or 2.5 which one of these would be ideal for 300+ horse. does the rule follows like the RWD? no replacement for displacement? what do you guys think? keep in mind im doing it right the first time, ground up. and if they ever have a gumball rally here in canada i want to be able to have my 89 MNI-GLH clone kick some --- and not explode on me.
i need some input on this one.:thumb:

deuce dodge
12-25-2005, 08:49 AM
adding to the question.........

have 87 sc t2 conv..lw rods :( runs 14.6 (spinning street tires) 98.4 mph @15 psi..w/fifth injector ...stock block...a525.....will swap in a 520...w/moly.and slicks want to run 20 psi max.

also have good 89 common block needs rebuild........

i only have $500..........no forged anything.......:(

want to hit 12.'s

question

1. go cb 2.2 or cb 2.5?

2. if 2.5 will i need new cal?

3. keep87 t1 lw rods and block in car and try 20 psi w/sixth injector?:thumb:

4. what hp should i shoot for for 12.,s

thanks

deuce

GLHSKEN
12-25-2005, 10:56 AM
It's a matter of the car... age old debate which I'm happy is being raised here.

Heavier car, you can't beat the umph of the 2.5 off the line, but above 4800 rpm, the 2.2 will have the advantage over all but the best built ones. (read $$$)

Lighter car, You have more than enough torque from a 2.2L and up topp it's a rocket. FOr the street minimising wheelspin is what is needed.

Duece. I ran 12's on a stock TII set-up (lw rods and all) in an '87 GLHS Charger. Open 3" downpipe, +20's Mopar Stage II LM and boost set at 18 psi. 12.85 @ 109.7mph. This was a full interior 2600lb race weight car. (now for the purists... I said stock hardware... not set-up :thumb:) I also was using an A520 trans... Based on weight, roughly 260-270 WHP. So a little over 300 crank. The car would spin the tires form a 60 mph roll...

altered7151
12-25-2005, 03:07 PM
Ken pretty much hit the nail on the head. The thing you have to take into account is that even though the addage "no replacement for displacement" somewhat holds true, it all depends on how you make the displacement. Although boost is a great replacement:thumb: . The 2.5 is just a stroked 2.2, so you'll get more low end grunt but lose top end. Like Ken said thats great for getting a heavier car like a daytona off the line. I'm building a SC and feel the 2.2 has plenty of umph. With the T2 conversion, which is a true conversion with heavy forged crank, at 14psi it'll break the 195's loose through 3rd, why you would need more low end then that I'm not sure. I'm going 2.2 CB, with the cast 2.2 crank so it rpm's a little quicker. I feel thats an awesome match for an l-body.

GLHSKEN
12-25-2005, 03:13 PM
I really like the 2.2CB and 2.2L cast crank combo...

TeddyZ
12-25-2005, 03:31 PM
cb????

Boost+Spray=:o
12-25-2005, 03:43 PM
Now i would go the other way cb (common block, 89-newer) with 2.5 crank. 2.5 get going so much sooner and run 12's in l bodys easily have seen it done on many different forms of street tires.

8valves
12-25-2005, 07:15 PM
I happen to feel that the question is do you just want the bragging rights of a 12 second timeslip, or do you want to play with solid 12 second cars on the streets. Sorry boys, but a 12.XX at 105 mph (very possible, espescially with a slick'd 2.5 L body) isn't going to get it done when it comes to solid 12 second players on the street.

That's a quick car, no doubt, but if you're trying to gauge this of "he runs a 12 in his LS1 I run 12's, it's a good match" thing, make sure you're looking at the MPH factor just as much if not more than the ET.

Just my opinion though, and I like to do freeway races, go figure! :p

Aaron Miller
<best time, 13.4 @ 114 mph... what 2.5!?) :eyebrows:

shelbyplaya
12-26-2005, 12:15 AM
i'd go a 2.2L in an omni. i've had both motors in one of my daytonas and in a HEAVY (3200lbs) car a 2.5L is the way to go.... in a car as light as a omni i'd go with a 2.2

deuce dodge
12-26-2005, 09:12 AM
reality

that sad word.........................:(

if i go 2.5 rebuild using old pistons and crank i can see it costing $500.and thats just cleaning , bearings,gaskets ,rings ,and having short block assembled.

if i go 2.2 in the 89 common i have to use both motors to get one ........will the very used pistons and crank just swap into the cb. ?.the 2.2 is acting well used .........

KEN...............can i use glhs stage 2 cal from fwdperformance for the +20,s?..or do i need a new cal also........

and what about using the cal in 2.5??????

........caution..............i only have $500.

guys thanks for the insight...

as a side note>>> before winning US MARTIN 131 SPORT COMPLEX/PAYNE TECH. SPORT COMPACT SHOOTOUT......AND BEFORE DOING T2 CONVERSION..............I ASKED FOR ADVICE AND A GUY NAMED KEN .........YUP SAME GUY...... SHOWED ME THE WAY..........and team "deuces wild" did it with a shoe string budget.

BIGGEST THANKS TO GLHSKEN

deuce

GLHSKEN
12-26-2005, 10:52 AM
guys thanks for the insight...

as a side note>>> before winning US MARTIN 131 SPORT COMPLEX/PAYNE TECH. SPORT COMPACT SHOOTOUT......AND BEFORE DOING T2 CONVERSION..............I ASKED FOR ADVICE AND A GUY NAMED KEN .........YUP SAME GUY...... SHOWED ME THE WAY..........and team "deuces wild" did it with a shoe string budget.

BIGGEST THANKS TO GLHSKEN

deuce


WOW... Thanks.. :o


if i go 2.2 in the 89 common i have to use both motors to get one ........will the very used pistons and crank just swap into the cb. ?.the 2.2 is acting well used .........


No, The early crank will not swap to the common block. Your best bet is to take the rods from the common block and swap 2.2L (floating pin) pistons on them and rebuild the 2.2L if you want to stay 2.2L.

Take a look at the CB and the early block. If they have the cross hatching there, You can simply re-ring them.. Never had an issue with that. I built an engine out of 5 different engines in my basement. Using only plastigage. Worked great.


KEN...............can i use glhs stage 2 cal from fwdperformance for the +20,s?..or do i need a new cal also........


Where is the map?? on the LM (86 based code) or not (87 based code). You should be able to use the lm with +20's if you have an adj fuel regulator (a must when going larger injectors) I do know the GLHS stage II from moppar will handle them no sweat.

If you go 2.5L... it is best to get a recal. There were no pre smec 2.5L cals and the timing and fuel curves are different. You can try the 2.2 cal, but you will have to turn the base timing down... The timing curves are too aggressive for a 2.5L. I have a convertible running a 2.5L with an mp 2.2L cal. You will need the +20's for extra fuel then. Mine runs stock 55psi fuel and 8^ base timing. It's an automatic and sluggish off the line, but then just rips.

Marcus86GLHS
12-26-2005, 11:19 AM
...dont forget a semi-gutted omni weighing in at say 2,200 pounds only needs about 200 hp not 300 hp at the tires for a 12.xx sec ET, and that HP is simple to make with any stock TII engine with a manual boost control added (a $10 grainger valve) set to make 18 psi and add some +20's with a good 2.5" or 3" exhaust and sticky tires.

i am thinking of your $500 budget on this......your race weight will determine the HP required.

8valves
12-26-2005, 12:16 PM
For the original poster who is saying he wants to do it right the first time, save your money and build a forged bottom end 2.2 CB motor, don't skimp, it will give you peace of mind later on in the cars life when you want to upgrade again.

For Deuce here, if you're on a $500 budget, just so a stock rebuild of the 2.5 and spend your other cash elsewhere on stuff like a real tranny and a pair of slicks. You can get your 12's like that if that's what you want.

Aaron Miller

TeddyZ
12-26-2005, 03:13 PM
For the original poster who is saying he wants to do it right the first time, save your money and build a forged bottom end 2.2 CB motor, don't skimp, it will give you peace of mind later on in the cars life when you want to upgrade again.

For Deuce here, if you're on a $500 budget, just so a stock rebuild of the 2.5 and spend your other cash elsewhere on stuff like a real tranny and a pair of slicks. You can get your 12's like that if that's what you want.

Aaron Miller

Im planning on to but dont know which block to go with.. i want to run around 300-350 horse with a good top end speed. im going to build my engine marine sytle. sit all day long at 5000 rpm if i want to my budget is 5000, 6000 if i beg the wife to let me:peace:

supercrackerbox
12-26-2005, 05:13 PM
Where is the map?? on the LM (86 based code) or not (87 based code). You should be able to use the lm with +20's if you have an adj fuel regulator (a must when going larger injectors) I do know the GLHS stage II from moppar will handle them no sweat.

Don't forget that there was a factory recall in 86 wich upgraded the cars to an underhood MAP sensor. Best to check part numbers just to be sure.


If you go 2.5L... it is best to get a recal. There were no pre smec 2.5L cals and the timing and fuel curves are different. You can try the 2.2 cal, but you will have to turn the base timing down... The timing curves are too aggressive for a 2.5L. I have a convertible running a 2.5L with an mp 2.2L cal. You will need the +20's for extra fuel then. Mine runs stock 55psi fuel and 8^ base timing. It's an automatic and sluggish off the line, but then just rips.

Definately spend the dough on a recall if you go this route. We have an Omni here in Lincoln with a very similar setup to this, although it's mated to an A-555 rather than an A-413. It took a lot of trial and error to get everything set right. It made roughly 200hp and 300ft.lbs. on the dyno, but it also falls flat on it's face at 4500rpm, and starts running into detonation issues about there as well.

For my own car (88 Shelby Z), after reading the insanely long debate over this on the another forum, I chose to go with a 2.2 commonblock with a cast crank. I ripped a 2.2 NA motor out of a 94 shadow, used some heavy rods from an 87 Shelby Z, and ordered some Weisco pistons from TU. Yeah, I probably came in right around $500 on the machine work, but I wasn't skimping on this car. I chose to go with the cast crank over the forged due to the lower rotating mass. They're still plenty strong; I don't believe I've seen anyone break one, cast or forged.

I knew the car would see way more street and highway use than track use (in fact I have yet to get any car to the track), and I felt I would better benefit from the high end breathability at the sacrifice of a small amount of low end torque. Even at the 5psi of boost I was running during break-in, the car had no problem spinning the tires, and at 15 psi, the thing screamed in the top end. Too bad I didn't get the chance to run that 25psi cal.:(

GLHNSLHT2
12-26-2005, 08:08 PM
light car go 2.2, heavy go 2.5

As for the 2.5 falling on it's face at 4800 rpms. PFFFT. My stock head, stock intake and stock i/c from my 87 Z with a 2.5 shortblock under it liked 5700rpm shift points. Any less and it ran slower. With the Cummins I/C it likes 6grand now. If ya build a 2.5 right it'll rev out and pull in the top end just fine.

tryingbe
12-26-2005, 11:42 PM
i only have $500..........no forged anything.......:(



Cheap, fast, reliable, pick two.

Get more work so you can get more money.

86Shelby
12-27-2005, 02:44 AM
We have an Omni here in Lincoln with a very similar setup to this, although it's mated to an A-555 rather than an A-413. It took a lot of trial and error to get everything set right. It made roughly 200hp and 300ft.lbs. on the dyno, but it also falls flat on it's face at 4500rpm, and starts running into detonation issues about there as well.

Yes, Adam's right, I run 4* base timing to avoid detonation at 3200 RPM; torque peak and leanest AFR. Here' a link to my combo with a dyno chart. http://www.turbododge.com/forums/showpost.php?p=854732&postcount=7 This setup really is a bunch of mismatched parts that would do wonders with a custom calibration or a bathtub head.

bobr19
12-27-2005, 11:32 AM
Ken pretty much hit the nail on the head. I'm going 2.2 CB, with the cast 2.2 crank so it rpm's a little quicker. I feel thats an awesome match for an l-body.
Yeah buddy:amen: -Thanks to Pooky and Jb88Z this is exactly what my 83 charger will have along with a set of Wisecos, car weight is 2285:D --gonna see how this combo really works this summer--bobr19

supercrackerbox
12-27-2005, 02:54 PM
Yes, Adam's right, I run 4* base timing to avoid detonation at 3200 RPM; torque peak and leanest AFR. Here' a link to my combo with a dyno chart. http://www.turbododge.com/forums/showpost.php?p=854732&postcount=7 This setup really is a bunch of mismatched parts that would do wonders with a custom calibration or a bathtub head.

Yes, I'm sure that swapping to a G-head, better IC, and possibly a different cam would make a huge difference, but time will tell.

glhs875
12-27-2005, 02:54 PM
light car go 2.2, heavy go 2.5

As for the 2.5 falling on it's face at 4800 rpms. PFFFT. My stock head, stock intake and stock i/c from my 87 Z with a 2.5 shortblock under it liked 5700rpm shift points. Any less and it ran slower. With the Cummins I/C it likes 6grand now. If ya build a 2.5 right it'll rev out and pull in the top end just fine.



My feelings exactly, either engine can be made to run good. I just recently built a customer a .040 2.5 with a stock G head w/roller cam, ported 1 piece intake, 2.5" swingvalve, ported exhaust manifold,50 trim stage 3 hybrid turbo, SRT4 intercooler, w/manual trans. for his 87 Charger. It ran really good, and easily pulled hard past 6000rpm. I have had good running 2.2's, and if I hadn't of built the engine myself, I wouldn't be able to tell the difference from the power band vs. a 2.2. The main difference I noticed from a 2.2 is that there was no turbo lag with the stage 3 turbine wheel like my 2.2 had when it was a 5 speed.

GLHNSLHT2
12-27-2005, 08:30 PM
I was really surprised with the results as I have read since 1998 how 2.5's don't rev as well as a 2.2. That's why at my 1st time at the track with it I dropped the shift points 200rpms under my 2.2's shift points. Tried raising them after feeling it wasn't as fast at the track as it felt driving it around on the street.

mrboost
12-27-2005, 10:32 PM
My 2.5L is pulling decently @ 7000RPM, but that's higher then it wants to be shifted. New cam going in and other air flow mods will probably change this though.

Dyno plots I have show that a 2.5L with a T-II turbo and intercooler, and pretty much no other mods is falling off by almost 25HP between 5500 and 6000 RPM, but with a ported head, larger cooler and a hybrid turbo the HP plot is still flat and usefull @ 6000 RPM.

Bottom line, 2.5s will spin, but they need the air to do so, airflow=$, so if you have a light car and a 2.2L already, go for it, you won't be dissapointed!


I was really surprised with the results as I have read since 1998 how 2.5's don't rev as well as a 2.2. That's why at my 1st time at the track with it I dropped the shift points 200rpms under my 2.2's shift points. Tried raising them after feeling it wasn't as fast at the track as it felt driving it around on the street.

JuXsA
12-28-2005, 02:53 PM
if you have a light weight car just stick with the 2.2... I am doing a 2.5 for my csxt because of the tourqe. Unless you are going to be porting the head, intake, and exhaust manifold, the 2.2 and the 2.5 are going to drop within a few hundred rpms of each other. With a significanly better flowing induction system then a 2.2 could be better. But remember, although it was never made mopar was toying with a 16v 2.5 that was making over 300hp.

show-off
12-28-2005, 03:09 PM
I just built a balanced and blueprinted 2.2L. It has .040 Wiseco pistons, T2 rods w/ ARP bolts and a Forged Crank w/ ARP studs. I have a heavily ported +1mm head and intake (by mr. p-body). Hell look at my signature. It is running now. Currently at the muffler shop gettng the 3" w/ dynomax bullet. It is running stock T2 setup right now. It is pretty nasty just the way it is, but I have lots of $$$$MONEY$$$$ in this freakin car! When I crank it up to 25psi on the new cal it should be a beast, but I have it set-up for lots of air.

My set-up is in your price range that you threw out there (5-6K)

deuce dodge
12-28-2005, 07:40 PM
wow

KEN were you runnng slicks for 12's?

i have an a520/3:50 that i will rebuild w/moly.......

am going to build common block 2.2 per KEN:)

map on lm.......

question ..have a 2.2 85 short block and 87 short block..........ddg and mini seem to infer that this crank will run in common block.....am i reading these wrong?
85 might be wrong hole 's for flywheel...........but whats the truth ?

and what piston would you buy.....used from fwd or autozone slugs :).i need a source..lol....cain't afford $450 wisecos........

deuce

GLHSKEN
12-28-2005, 07:54 PM
85 has a 6 bolt fly wheel pattern (and more than likely 10mm head bolts). Use the 87.

The cranks will not work without being machined for a common block crank snout size.

You can make great reliable power with an earlier block if done right. There is a local daytona running low 11's at 125mph with one..

Just use Mahle's... I tend to stick to good used slugs from our cars over after market.

Yes, I was on slicks... the car was useless without them... Ran a best of 13.97 @ 107mph on streets (with that set-up) She would roll just about everyone on the freeway (never lost)

Made that pass with an A520 with a moly plate and 3.5 fd.

If the map is on the LM, You have 86 electronics... I personally think the GLHS Stage II was the best factory module you could buy.

For a well thought out set-up, see Show-off's!!! That's a 300+ whp VERY reliable car.. Mid to low 12's are possible at 110-115mph.

Xtrempickup
12-28-2005, 10:12 PM
I am a fan of 2.2Ls, the 2.5 i feel is great for torque, but if you want Top-end speed, you would want to build a beefy 2.2L. The whole 2.5 L in a heavy car will help out the lack of bottom end that the 2.2L really doesnt have a lot of, but the 2.5L will spin tires most likely easier. Is there a replacement for displacement, yes, Turbos and superchargers. will a 2.2L ever make a 1000HP, not likely but for the 400hp that have been made with them soo far, its pretty impressive.

show-off
12-29-2005, 12:52 AM
For a well thought out set-up, see Show-off's!!! That's a 300+ whp VERY reliable car.. Mid to low 12's are possible at 110-115mph.

Thanks for the compliment! The TU hybrid header and DBB turbo later this year should put me into the 11's if I can't reach it now! Soon...very soon.

deuce dodge
12-29-2005, 09:25 PM
THANKS KEN.........now i feel im sitting on a pile of sweet goodies :)


we have a t2 omin that is getting the "GLHSKEN" treatment and my sc is on its way to "GLHSKEN".....woo hooooooooo

Ken when you built 1 from 5 with just plastiguage did you send the block out or just wing the whole thing...........i mean learn as you go build from worn parts and new bearings and rings...........just making sure holes are retapped and clearances are close?????

do i dare just build a motor from my stack of parts.....:)

when my wife married me i had a harley motor in my closet...after we married i reringed it "snowmobile rings" and put it on a frame and rode it.

was yours that whacked...or did you have machine shop smooth it up first??? i can't wait to get started...

deuce

turbovanmanČ
12-29-2005, 09:49 PM
Excellent info Paul, you would know, :thumb:

I personally am a torque junky, so 2.5 for me, :amen:

Tony Hanna
01-03-2006, 03:31 PM
I personally am a torque junky, so 2.5 for me, :amen:

+1 :thumb:

SMPerformance
01-03-2006, 06:08 PM
snip..will a 2.2L ever make a 1000HP, not likely snip..

do You want to bet on that :lol: ;)

altered7151
01-03-2006, 06:33 PM
do You want to bet on that :lol: ;)
:amen:

turbovanmanČ
01-04-2006, 01:16 AM
do You want to bet on that :lol: ;)



:clap2: :cheer2: :peace:

Tony Hanna
01-10-2006, 05:15 AM
do You want to bet on that :lol: ;)
Canada's Fastest sport compact
1987 Shelby Charger 8.40@171.84MPH
Best Mph 174.23MPH

2005 Pro 4 cyl 3rd place championship NDRA


I'd call my project a screaming success just to ET in the 1/8 what you do in the 1/4! :thumb:
That's just amazing.:D

GLHSKEN
01-10-2006, 07:33 AM
Ken when you built 1 from 5 with just plastiguage did you send the block out or just wing the whole thing...........i mean learn as you go build from worn parts and new bearings and rings...........just making sure holes are retapped and clearances are close?????



deuce
Sorry just saw this today.

Nothing was sent out. Rods block crank and pistons all from the basement. New rings and bearings. Matched the pistons to the bore letters on the block..

It's definately not the right way. I got a way with it for a while. Best bet is to really build one right and be patient.

turbovanmanČ
01-10-2006, 02:53 PM
Sorry just saw this today.

Nothing was sent out. Rods block crank and pistons all from the basement. New rings and bearings. Matched the pistons to the bore letters on the block..

It's definately not the right way. I got a way with it for a while. Best bet is to really build one right and be patient.

I 2nd that. If your unsure, have a well known machine shop check everything out, then he can clean it up and do the necessary machine work and you can put it together. Get some ARP rod bolts at the bare minimum, I would also get ARP head studs-reuseable and main studs as who knows what shape your stock main bolts are in.

deuce dodge
01-14-2006, 07:37 PM
WOO HOOOOOOOOOOO thank you pic n pays

just pulled a 2.2 cb motor out of a 94 sundance........had been crashed....and what do i find?....sweetest crank you ever seen........standing in the corner of my garage right now.......not a scratch on journals...one journal has a slight "milky" look to it......strange......but i love it........

i now have.

1. 89 cb

2. 94 2.2 crank

3. 89 turbo 1 rods

4. 4 possible 85-86 pistons.....one set 20 over..one ???

and im gonna quit my crappy job monday..............i now have a new job :)

--next come the + 20's--- :)

KEN AND SIMON........i was supposed to go to sdac last year and all HECK broke out.........where is it gonna be and when......WOOO HOOOOOO

deuce

GLHNSLHT2
01-14-2006, 08:39 PM
I am a fan of 2.2Ls, the 2.5 i feel is great for torque, but if you want Top-end speed, you would want to build a beefy 2.2L.

My "no top end speed" 2.5 runs 150MPH at 6psi. How much more top end do you want??? One day with enough road I'm gonna peg the rev limiter at 172.2MPH :) Need to run 15+psi though.

GLHSKEN
01-14-2006, 09:05 PM
LOL... 2.2's will accelerate up top quicker... Hows that??? I was pulling 26mph on the big end of the strip... No one said that given enough road both could not achieve the same top speed ;)

supercrackerbox
01-14-2006, 09:53 PM
Do you mean 126mph I hope?


WOO HOOOOOOOOOOO thank you pic n pays

just pulled a 2.2 cb motor out of a 94 sundance........

That's what I did for the motor in my 88, 'cept I used that block as well. The machine shop charged me $12 to drill the block and press in a tube for the oil return. I used some rods from an 87 TII.

GLHSKEN
01-14-2006, 09:56 PM
Do you mean 126mph I hope?



That's what I did for the motor in my 88, 'cept I used that block as well. The machine shop charged me $12 to drill the block and press in a tube for the oil return. I used some rods from an 87 TII.


YEP... Use the block

GLHNSLHT2
01-14-2006, 10:07 PM
my 2.5 pulls way harder up top than the 2.2 it replaced. same head, i/c, intake exhaust, turbo.

supercrackerbox
01-14-2006, 10:09 PM
same head, i/c, intake exhaust, turbo.

And are all these stock or modified? What about cam timing, boost, and such?

GLHSKEN
01-14-2006, 10:12 PM
my 2.5 pulls way harder up top than the 2.2 it replaced. same head, i/c, intake exhaust, turbo.


LOL... too much fun.. you and I need a good 2 mile stretch to let the cars go on. I very much respect the 2.5L... done right they fly

turbovanmanČ
01-14-2006, 11:19 PM
KEN AND SIMON........i was supposed to go to sdac last year and all HECK broke out.........where is it gonna be and when......WOOO HOOOOOO

deuce

Its at Topeka, Kansas, weekend of July 23rd. I am getting there on the 20th and can't wait, gonna be a blast. :thumb: :amen:


LOL... too much fun.. you and I need a good 2 mile stretch to let the cars go on. I very much respect the 2.5L... done right they fly


Amen on that, I just need to fix my last cork and my 2.5 should pull like a mofo to 6000 and beyond, :thumb:

GLHNSLHT2
01-14-2006, 11:39 PM
And are all these stock or modified? What about cam timing, boost, and such?

I took the 2.2 shortblock out from under all the stuff that was bolted onto it and shoved a 2.5 shorblock under, The exhaust manifold was ported when it was 2.2. and the exhaust modified as well. Those were the only mods on the 2.2. I kept all the same stuff on the 2.5. At 15psi the 2.2 went 14.4@99.62. at 13.5psi the 2.5 went 13.882@101.80:nod:

deuce dodge
01-15-2006, 08:52 AM
great i put the block back under the car.........:(...dohhhhhhhhhh.maybe i can go back and grab block........

SIMON thanks for info....will try to make it.....

deuce

Austrian Dodge
01-15-2006, 10:44 AM
Well I just read through all this and I'm confused what to do on my car.
I put together a 2.2 CB last year, couldn't drive it because i put in the wrong main bearings, so the engine is out again.
Now i have a 10/10 turned 2.2 forgend crank, no rods and no pistons (will sell those, because i'm going forged all the way) and i have a stock 2.5 crank out of a '92 2.5 T1. Turning this crank wouldn't be a problem, and is not expensive at all...

ok, what to do now? I read through the 10pages 2.2 vs 2.5 thread on TD.com, and I'm just as planless as before.
I need power for exiting turns, no questions, but I also need powerband for straights.
On one hand I don't want to build a 2.2, and then realize I have no power when I exit a turn...seconds of WOT and nothing because I'm waiting till that turbo hits, and on the other hand I don't want to build a 2.5 realizing I have to shift before 5500rpm (like a diesel :banghead: ) on straights because there's just no usefull power anymore.

I owned a '89 TII Daytona...I loved the characteristics of that engine, pulled hard till redline, awesome.
Then I bought a '92 2.5 T1 and hated the characteristics of this engine, yuk...just had no power beyond 5000, horrible
But then, those were both stock, so I really have no idea how a 2.2 and a 2.5 will compare when they're properly built!

I want the car ('92 Daytona Iroc) to be a road race car, just a little bit of a summer weekend car. See my current mods in my sig. But I'll soon change to a GT-Series Turbo (first choice is a GT30).

Aaron has a 2.2 equipped with a gt30 and pushed nearly 400whp (which is my goal also), he spooles his turbo by 4100...
Chris W.'s road race car is also a 2.2 with a DBB turbo...
Rattlesnake has a 2.5 road race spirit equipped with a PT61 turbo, and this thing spools by 4200...

I thinking of building an individual throttle body setup, but am not sure if it's worth it, so maybe the new lonewolf perf. 8V intake will be just fine for my goals.

:confused: :confused:
i have really no idea which engine is suited more for road racing.

Please help me

GLHSKEN
01-15-2006, 11:13 AM
Think about this... ALL of the one lap cars have used the 2.2L turbo. Rattlesnake has definately done his engine right... moving the powerband to the right. Much tougher to duplicate in a 2.5L.

GLHNSLHT2 likes the way his car responded. Typically the rule of thumb applies... Light go 2.2L Heavy and auto, go 2.5L Light and manual, go 2.2L. You can control the RPM with the shift points so you are always at the sweet spot.

Most of the fastest guys I know have changed back from a 2.5L or are considering doing so. The prevailing thought would be to destroke to a 2.0L...

You have owned both... No one can sit back and tell you what to do... you read the extperiences and make a judgement call.. Too much torque from a 5 sp exiting the turns due to the low end torque is also an issue..

turbovanmanČ
01-15-2006, 04:10 PM
Again, the running out of steam at 5000 rpm on a 2.5 can be fixed easily, a larger turbo and some port work. Look at Cliff Ramsdel's TIII 2.5L, it had so much power, he got rid of it-joking.
My friend has a stock 89 Shadow, loaded, no a/c, 2.5 mitsu 5 speed and his only mods are 2.5 inch exhaust, no cat and a Flowmaster. This car has NO TRACTION. I can spin the tires in 1st, 2nd and 3rd, I was in 2nd gear powersliding it around corners, its insane. I think we have the boost at around 11 psi and no IC.

Based on my van, his car and others I have driven, go with a 2.2L, easier to get out of the corners then you can hammer it on the straightaway. My .02 cents.

GLHNSLHT2
01-15-2006, 10:59 PM
It's easy to lose traction in a Mitsu car. The instant boost just rips the tires loose and keeps them loose. Been in that same situation, little 88 ES shadow turbo. Could just lite the tires up any time. My Daytona would eat it alive but won't break the tires loose.

Austrian Dodge
01-17-2006, 02:55 PM
hmm...
sounds like i should stick with the 2.2 and propably will, thanks ;)