So what are you Guys reving your 2.5L's to?

[Aries_Turbo]

i dont have crazy expectations. im in the camp that the power would be concentrated in the low rpms still just like it was but maybe 100 or so rpms higher based on the cams and plenum. im not arguing to say that it will make peak power at 7k or something dumb like that. i shift my 2.5L at 5k. hope you arent getting all excited over me

it was purely speculation based on the fact that, though the factory 16v parts are pretty good, anything can be improved for an increase in efficiency, maybe better spoolup and a small increase in topend to further maximize that brutal midrange.

Brian

[mopar-tech]

i dont have crazy expectations. im in the camp that the power would be concentrated in the low rpms still just like it was but maybe 100 or so rpms higher based on the cams and plenum.

Try de-stroking the engine.

aka 2.2

[Aries_Turbo]

yeah the 2.2 would probably be better with all that top work.

Brian

[2.216VTurbo]

Try de-stroking the engine.

aka 2.2

Or further I gotta get the fricken shop to finish the 2l crank

[cordes]

Or further I gotta get the fricken shop to finish the 2l crank

How long has that been in the works? You must have taken it to the busiest shop in the US, as you can get CNC time around here for 30-35 bucks an hour.

[2.216VTurbo]

How long has that been in the works? You must have taken it to the busiest shop in the US, as you can get CNC time around here for 30-35 bucks an hour.

F'n shop owner tells me 'Come by on Thursday' every effin week. Thursday's have come and gone for 8 months now, last time I tried to just take my 2 cranks and snout pullies outta there but he begged me for one more week

[moparzrule]

F'n shop owner tells me 'Come by on Thursday' every effin week. Thursday's have come and gone for 8 months now, last time I tried to just take my 2 cranks and snout pullies outta there but he begged me for one more week

Sounds like you have the same issues with machine shops like I do around here. It's either take forever for decent work, pay an azzload for decent work quickly, or still pay a lot for crap work. There's no cheap.

[cordes]

F'n shop owner tells me 'Come by on Thursday' every effin week. Thursday's have come and gone for 8 months now, last time I tried to just take my 2 cranks and snout pullies outta there but he begged me for one more week

That's the worst. I had a short block in the machine shop for 5mo once. I was not happy, but in the end they did good work.

[glhs875]

I think we can all agree the DOHC parts are much better than the SOHC no?

The head and exhaust manifold are stellar pieces compared to what is used on the SOHC.

Saying it still isn't good enough because the results don't match what you would like to see is illogical.

Make changes, observe the results.

People still don't get it.

I don't think your totally getting it as well. If the port/valve area is there for a given rpm/cubic inch and with no other limiting factors, the engine will make power to whatever rpm the math works out to. Even though Cliffs was a 16V, what is the port area of the head he was using. I'm sure it flows better than an 8V, but how much more port area over an 8V are there?

I enlarged the port/valve area on my 2.2 8V alot over stock (larger than 655 casting ports) and I assure you that peak power was raised well over 6K. By the math my port size would make power to around 8K. And it felt as though it would if the valvetrain would of been up to the task. Had problems above 7200rpm. I'm working on that issue. Warren Stramer is trying out a fix I came up with before I will get to try it. Now I will admit a 2.5 will never make peak HP as high in the RPM range as a 2.2 with the same bore as a 2.2. Not enough room to get the valve/port area needed to feed the 2.5 as well in the upper R's as a 2.2. And of course the long stroke is a factor as well. But it still can be made to peak a good bit higher in the R's than it does stock.

[mopar-tech]

I don't think your totally getting it as well.

Best of luck, Im just passing along what I learned about 2.5's and I'm moving on.

Perhaps you will talk to Brian Slowe, he moved from a 2.5 because it made too much low end power too.

I can assure you his 16V head, cams and intake flows far more than Cliffs and it still made something like 600 ft/lbs of torque.

2.5.is.a.stroker.motor.

[GLHNSLHT2]

I don't think your totally getting it as well. If the port/valve area is there for a given rpm/cubic inch and with no other limiting factors, the engine will make power to whatever rpm the math works out to. Even though Cliffs was a 16V, what is the port area of the head he was using. I'm sure it flows better than an 8V, but how much more port area over an 8V are there?

I enlarged the port/valve area on my 2.2 8V alot over stock (larger than 655 casting ports) and I assure you that peak power was raised well over 6K. By the math my port size would make power to around 8K. And it felt as though it would if the valvetrain would of been up to the task. Had problems above 7200rpm. I'm working on that issue. Warren Stramer is trying out a fix I came up with before I will get to try it. Now I will admit a 2.5 will never make peak HP as high in the RPM range as a 2.2 with the same bore as a 2.2. Not enough room to get the valve/port area needed to feed the 2.5 as well in the upper R's as a 2.2. And of course the long stroke is a factor as well. But it still can be made to peak a good bit higher in the R's than it does stock.

That won't work, Gary D said the 655 has no low lift flow and won't work on our cars. You should know that.

[Shadow]

That won't work, Gary D said the 655 has no low lift flow and won't work on our cars. You should know that.

I don't agree with 100% of what Gary says. Having said that, the early info he and others made available was not only invaluable, it saved me from having to break a lot of S@#T myself as I worked out my own build. Being a smart A@S to a member of our community who has openly shared the amount of experience he has doesn't make you look smart, quite the opposite.

[Directconnection]

Being a smart A@S to a member of our community who has openly shared the amount of experience he has doesn't make you look smart, quite the opposite.

[GLHNSLHT2]

well nobody says I was trying to look smart.

[turbovanman²]

That won't work, Gary D said the 655 has no low lift flow and won't work on our cars. You should know that.

That's the reason some fast guys don't talk or share info. Sure he has his opinions and things have changed some but don't be a smart azz about it, he is still one of the fastest TD guys around, and his sharing of knowledge has helped 100's go fast.

[glhs875]

That's the reason some fast guys don't talk or share info. Sure he has his opinions and things have changed some but don't be a smart azz about it, he is still one of the fastest TD guys around, and his sharing of knowledge has helped 100's go fast.

Well put. And I mean no disrespect to Gary at all.

[puppet]

psst ... (who's Gary?)









:P

[shadow88]

As much as I hate to be involved in this mud throwing thread, I have a question.

Speaking of improving on the engine's natural torque and horsepower peaks, where does the 2.5 and 2.2 naturally peak for both hp and tq?

[Shadow]

well nobody says I was trying to look smart.

Fair enough, I just don't understand the animosity? If you really feel that strongly about it, get your 2.5 tuned to perfection, dyno it and see for yourself. If you make peak power beyond 6000rpm, then you have some backing for your position.

[glhs875]

According to Wiki:

Honda 2156cc, F22A engine is 85 x 95, 150 HP at 5700, 152 ft lb @ 4900
Honda 2254cc. F23 engine is 86 x 97, 140 HP @ 5600, 145 ft lb @ 4000

The 2.2 of course is 87.5 x 92 and the 2.5 is 87.5 x 104

Here's a better Honda example

H22 vtec
bore 3.43 stroke 3.57 rod 5.63"
HP 190@6800rpm torque 158@5300rpm



H23 non vtec
bore 3.43 stroke 3.74 rod 5.57"
HP 160@5800rpm torque 156@4500


Both of these engines are similar to our 2.2 and 2.5 engines in bore and in block geometry. I would like to see what the vtec head off the H22 would do to the peak HP on the H23. That would be interesting to me. I fully feel like it would be lower than 6800rpm that the H22 peaked at, but raised a good amount over 5800rpm as well.