2.5 high torque or 2.2?

[KillerTSI]

I would like to hear from you guys on what you prefer. I have always loved the 2.5 but I want to hear from others. Do you prefer 2.2 or 2.5?

[GLHNSLHT2]

over 2800lbs 2.5, under 2.2.

[turbovanman²]

Heavy and auto, 2.5. Heavy and stick, 50/50. Lighter, pick your poison, some like the 2.2, some like the 2.5.

A 2.5 with a decent head will rev just as nicely as a 2.2, so take that into consideration if you like to rev.

[tryingbe]

2.2 gets better gasmileage.

[vipernbox]

2.2 gets better gasmileage.

I have never found this to be true.. I can't explain it but I have always had 2.5 daytona's return better MPG than 2.2's... Port velocity might be marginally higher causing a better mixture.. I dunno... I have just never had a 2.2 return better MPG's than I could get with a 2.5 in the same platform.




There is no replacement for displacement.


The only exceptions when you are pushing well past the limits of stock parts.... and at that point.. if you have to ask.. well..


If you are building an engine for a driver/street car.. I can't think of a solid reason to give up the easy, and very cheap extra cubic inches..

[contraption22]

I prefer a 2.2.

[RoadWarrior222]

3.0

Heh, but I always liked the bottom end, just off idle, grunt in a 2.5 for scooting round in city traffic.

[BadAssPerformance]

As with anything, it really depends on what you want to use the car for with a dose of personal preference

[89FerrariShelby]

i love my 2.5, much more fun than the 2.2 the car came with...

though to be fair, i'm comparing a built 2.5 to a stock 2.2....

[GLHNSLHT2]

That's why I use weight. My GLHT at 2500lbs, my 87 New yorker at 2700lbs and a friends 85 laser at 2600ish lbs were all fine with the 2.2. The laser got a 2.5 and you had to launch at the track at 1100rpms with 225/50 15 Dunlop SP8000's or it'd just annialate them. My daytona nuked the original 2.2 due to the previous owner's stupidity but for the year or so I drove it it was like trying to launch an LMP car out of the pits in the rain at LeMans. Lots of clutch and throttle work to get rolling. Everyone thought I wanted to race. I dropped a 2.5 shortblock under the 2.2 T2 head and have NEVER looked back.

The 2.2 requires more throttle everywhere, so it's possible MPG gain from being a smaller displacement is negligible. The 2.5 in my daytona with a stock 87 T2 head/intake, +40's, FMIC ported exhaust manny, S60 turbo, 3" exhaust, 20lbs of boost, and some tuning of the ECU and wideband would get 34 around town and 40+ on the freeway at 70-75MPH. Can you ask for much more?

[KillerTSI]

I want to build a 2.5 TIII. How much power will the cast crank stand up to? Last time I checked a forged crank for the 2.5 was not exactly easy to come by.

[bakes]

I want to build a 2.5 TIII. How much power will the cast crank stand up to? Last time I checked a forged crank for the 2.5 was not exactly easy to come by.

I dont think you break a crank you will break other $hit 1 st .

[Reaper1]

I've had both and I like the 2.2 better. It's smoother. Yes, a 2.5 can rev, but IMHO the piston speeds are SCARY. Plain and simple the piston is going to outrun the pressure wave of the burning mixture above a given rpm (not saying what rpm because that is a variable) before the 2.2 will. Also the ring pack on a 2.5 is more easily damaged because of how high it is on the piston. The 2.5 also puts a lot of side loading on the piston due to rod angle.

The good things are that it does make more low end torque and can spool a turbo quicker simply because it moves more air. If it's a tall deck, long rod 2.5 THEN I'd go 2.5 all the way (provided it has pistons with a custom ring pack).

The TIII and the 2.5 are a good match and make a LOT of power, but I still like the 2.2 for its smoothness (that is a relative term when talking about 80's inline 4's! LOL)

[contraption22]

I want to build a 2.5 TIII. How much power will the cast crank stand up to? Last time I checked a forged crank for the 2.5 was not exactly easy to come by.

I don't know of anybody that ever broke a cast crank from sheer power.

[GLHNSLHT2]

I've had both and I like the 2.2 better. It's smoother. Yes, a 2.5 can rev, but IMHO the piston speeds are SCARY. Plain and simple the piston is going to outrun the pressure wave of the burning mixture above a given rpm (not saying what rpm because that is a variable) before the 2.2 will. Also the ring pack on a 2.5 is more easily damaged because of how high it is on the piston. The 2.5 also puts a lot of side loading on the piston due to rod angle.

I pulled my JE 8v pistons out of my 2.5 block last year after oh 8 years or so of driving and abuse of bad tunes I got from others, good tunes and shifting above 6grand to 7200. Yes doing the math on them is scary, but pulling them out and inspecting them they were in great shape. I sold them and they're already running in another car.

[KillerTSI]

I had an Iroc R/T (all stock) back in 03 and it was great. I sold it and the next TM I owned was a 2005 SRT-4 I bought in 06 when I joined the Army. I loved the way that car sounded and I loved the power delivery. I sold it when I deployed and bought another of the same year and color when I returned. I ended up selling it in 2009. After that I bought a 92 Daytona Iroc Shelby 2.5 and everything about it reminded me of my SRT. I now own a 92 Iroc R/T and I love it but I miss the sound and torque of the 2.5.. I would like to build a 2.5 TIII for it. The 2.5 would give me everything I miss from my SRT and more power also. When I did some research I was surprised to find out that the SRT crank was also cast and I have seen them hold 600hp on the stock bottom end so I am not real concerned with it but I wanted to hear from others in case some of the members have has problems with the cast cranks. There has been a lot of differences in the way things are made sense 92 and cranks are one of the things that could have been made better sense then so just because an SRT crank can hold 600hp does not mean a 92 cast crank can. This is why I was asking about the cranks.

[GLHNSLHT2]

isn't the SRT block stronger than ours with their bedplate?

[KillerTSI]

I see you TVN and I have been looking forward to reading your opinions. Lol

[turbovanman²]

I want to build a 2.5 TIII. How much power will the cast crank stand up to? Last time I checked a forged crank for the 2.5 was not exactly easy to come by.

Go for it, its a wicked combo. I believe Larry Buford has the highest HP on a cast crank 2.5, over 500 whp. Hell, I can't break one, lol.

I've had both and I like the 2.2 better. It's smoother. Yes, a 2.5 can rev, but IMHO the piston speeds are SCARY. Plain and simple the piston is going to outrun the pressure wave of the burning mixture above a given rpm (not saying what rpm because that is a variable) before the 2.2 will. Also the ring pack on a 2.5 is more easily damaged because of how high it is on the piston. The 2.5 also puts a lot of side loading on the piston due to rod angle.

The good things are that it does make more low end torque and can spool a turbo quicker simply because it moves more air. If it's a tall deck, long rod 2.5 THEN I'd go 2.5 all the way (provided it has pistons with a custom ring pack).

The TIII and the 2.5 are a good match and make a LOT of power, but I still like the 2.2 for its smoothness (that is a relative term when talking about 80's inline 4's! LOL)

Like Jay, apart from me melting them, I have never damaged the skirts etc from revving and with the stage 3 cams, it pulled easily to 7500 and was still pulling. Never damaged a top ring either and I've leaned out a few motors,

Smoothness, balanced, its pretty smooth, but I agree, the 2.2 is smoother.

I had an Iroc R/T (all stock) back in 03 and it was great. I sold it and the next TM I owned was a 2005 SRT-4 I bought in 06 when I joined the Army. I loved the way that car sounded and I loved the power delivery. I sold it when I deployed and bought another of the same year and color when I returned. I ended up selling it in 2009. After that I bought a 92 Daytona Iroc Shelby 2.5 and everything about it reminded me of my SRT. I now own a 92 Iroc R/T and I love it but I miss the sound and torque of the 2.5.. I would like to build a 2.5 TIII for it. The 2.5 would give me everything I miss from my SRT and more power also. When I did some research I was surprised to find out that the SRT crank was also cast and I have seen them hold 600hp on the stock bottom end so I am not real concerned with it but I wanted to hear from others in case some of the members have has problems with the cast cranks. There has been a lot of differences in the way things are made sense 92 and cranks are one of the things that could have been made better sense then so just because an SRT crank can hold 600hp does not mean a 92 cast crank can. This is why I was asking about the cranks.

Do it, you'll love it, The only issue you might have is tuning but with the recent work on cals, you should be ok.

[Force Fed Mopar]

over 2800lbs 2.5, under 2.2.

2.2 gets better gasmileage.

+1 to both. FTR I got better mileage out of my Daytona w/ a 2.2 520 3.50 FD than I do out of the Lebaron w/ the 2.5 523/568 hybrid w/ 3.77 FD. Although there is probably not much difference now that I have all the bugs worked out of the Lebaron. Both are pretty much stock except for an overbore, cam and upgraded intercoolers. The biggest difference was the highway mileage, the Daytona was getting 35-37 mpg at 70-80 mph on the interstate, the Lebaron is lucky to hit 30 mpg.