Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 28 of 28

Thread: Another 2.2 vs. 2.5 debate

  1. #21
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Spokane, Wa
    Posts
    8,978

    Re: Another 2.2 vs. 2.5 debate

    Bought this for my 16 year old daughter. No tickets yet knock on wood. 285hp stock. Now probably over 300 as the catless MPx downpipe is supposed to add 28hp and 34ft-lbs. Also installed a nice magnaflow cat-back, upgraded turbo and ported the exhaust manifold and turbo housings at the same time. Deciding on if I want to get a canned tune or do it my self just to get the boost up over it's factory 10psi.




    Quote Originally Posted by tryingbe View Post
    It's for a teenage girl, n/a would be plenty of power. I'd more worry what kind of friends she has or will anything distract her from driving than what kind of power the engine makes.

  2. #22
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, SC
    Posts
    2,083

    Re: Another 2.2 vs. 2.5 debate

    My 87 Shelby lancer has a 2.2 with a 50 trim and .63 turbine housing. It's modified a decent bit but I don't feel like I need more lower rpm torque. I also have 2 amplifiers and a really, really heavy 12" subwoofer out back. Don't think it's a particularly light car.

  3. #23
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Everett, WA
    Posts
    6,366

    Re: Another 2.2 vs. 2.5 debate

    I vote 2.5. Much better around town manners due to a smoother power band. Makes the car easier to drive, easier to learn how to drive defensively because you don't have to anticipate the car as much, and as much power as *any* teen needs on the street. Remember, when you're first learning to drive, EVERYTHING feels "fast".

  4. #24
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    omaha ne
    Posts
    1,529

    Re: Another 2.2 vs. 2.5 debate

    Ray is correct. Between all of us in the local chapter well have PLENTY of parts to throw something together. I also have MP scan and tune as well as a burner. Phil is closer to you and has become quite familiar with the process as well. I have a couple sets of 2.5 pistons and rods, MAYBE one more block. If not I have plenty of SRTn stuff we can throw a 16v in it- have to tune either way.....I also have one more 2.2 block (87) I have a 520 with 3.50 fd too. (unkown condition) shoot me text if you need anything.

  5. #25
    Supporting Member II Turbo Mopar Contributor Dr. Johny Dodge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Toronto Canada
    Posts
    1,320

    Re: Another 2.2 vs. 2.5 debate

    notes on turbo z's

    I had two blue 86 turbo z's (& 2 shelby z"s)
    first one was manual windows, mirrors and a/c - no rear wiper

    second one was power window , mirror , a/c and rear wiper

    the difference in the way the two drove was huge
    the first car was spry and nimble and really "light on it's feet"

    second car was a slug

    I think maybe the cars got different springs at the order point of "base power group"
    which would make sense with a 72 pound 16 way driver's seat

    turbo z's also sit about 1 inch lower than a shelby z or any daytonas that came after them
    (shelby z suspension swap raised my car)

  6. #26
    Supporting Member Turbo Mopar Contributor supercrackerbox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Firth, Nebraska
    Posts
    4,960

    Re: Another 2.2 vs. 2.5 debate

    Quote Originally Posted by GLHNSLHT2 View Post
    Bought this for my 16 year old daughter. No tickets yet knock on wood. 285hp stock. Now probably over 300 as the catless MPx downpipe is supposed to add 28hp and 34ft-lbs. Also installed a nice magnaflow cat-back, upgraded turbo and ported the exhaust manifold and turbo housings at the same time. Deciding on if I want to get a canned tune or do it my self just to get the boost up over it's factory 10psi.

    I'm very familiar with those cars; I'm in the process of parting mine out, and I just happen to have a couple of canned tunes for sale. I can see you're also missing the trim around the fog lights, and I have those too. What else do you need? Shoot me a PM, let's make some deals.
    Last edited by supercrackerbox; 12-15-2018 at 01:18 AM.

  7. #27
    Supporting Member Turbo Mopar Contributor supercrackerbox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Firth, Nebraska
    Posts
    4,960

    Re: Another 2.2 vs. 2.5 debate

    Jeff, once I get the new Daytona home next week, I'll have two complete 2.5s to choose from, plus the original one from my white car after it consumed a spark plug. I've also got the old 2.2 from my Charger, and the '88 2.2 I pulled out of my GLHS (although I think I sold the rods out of that one).

    Ideally, I'd like to rebuild the 2.5 coming out of my current Daytona. It's served me well for over 100k miles, and before that it was the engine that powered Ray's GLHS. I think that block may be starting a tradition, similar to the engine out of the old GLHT which went on to power my CSXT, then my Turbo Z CS, then Ray's wagon, and then Nate's Daytona.

    If only these Nebraska cars could survive the rust long enough to outlast the engines for once . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Johny Dodge View Post
    notes on turbo z's

    I had two blue 86 turbo z's (& 2 shelby z"s)
    first one was manual windows, mirrors and a/c - no rear wiper

    second one was power window , mirror , a/c and rear wiper

    the difference in the way the two drove was huge
    the first car was spry and nimble and really "light on it's feet"

    second car was a slug

    I think maybe the cars got different springs at the order point of "base power group"
    which would make sense with a 72 pound 16 way driver's seat

    turbo z's also sit about 1 inch lower than a shelby z or any daytonas that came after them
    (shelby z suspension swap raised my car)
    I also have had two Gunmetal blue '86s, one was a CS, both had rear wipers and power mirrors, but no other power options. The car we're building was my first one, and the first car I ever had. Since then I've had several other Daytonas, most recent is a '91 Shelby that I've put over 150,000 miles on. This car has every single option available except the sunroof (replaced by overhead console) and ABS brakes. I also have an '86 Charger with a high strung 2.2, it weighs 2400lbs with me in it, so I'm familiar with that side of the coin too. Basically I wanted to know what everyone thought about matching the computer to the available engine vs. matching the engine to the available computer.

  8. #28
    Supporting Member Turbo Mopar Contributor bfarroo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Green Bay WI
    Posts
    1,436

    Re: Another 2.2 vs. 2.5 debate

    I vote 2.5 all day every day for a street driven car that is relatively stock. The low end of the 2.5 is just way more drivable and fun compared to a 2.2. With the availability of people that can socket and flash a computer that's the easy part.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Great Head Debate!!!!!!
    By Xtrempickup in forum Engine - Block, Piston, Heads, Intakes
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 02-24-2008, 11:32 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •