Hybrid 22e with wrx heads?

[98legacygt22]

Ok so most of you on here have probably seen a post by me on more than one occasion. I keep changing my mind for this build. I have a set of EJ205 heads and intake which I plan on running. Now I have the option to buy an EJ205 short block with a spun bearing for $150, which I want to do but at the same time I already have an EJ22E short block that is already split, and all the internals/block are in great shape. Was thinking instead of buying the 205 short block (more money to replace the crank and rods, if the block is even use-able) that I might just run the 22E short block with maybe some aftermarket rods and pistons to handle the boost. Sorry for the millions of questions but I am about to start building and would like YOUR opinion. This is a budget turbo setup keep in mind. Also would you guys keep the 22E pistons or upgrade to a set of Weisco's?

[lord flashheart]

150 is too much for a 2.0 shortblock core.. ive seen them go for 50 bucks.

its not a horrible way to go, but you should:
1) take your heads to a local machine shop and have them looked at. its super super comon to burn exhaust valves, and crack between the seats (dont worrie about the cracks from the seat to the spark plug). also tell them you spun a rod, and the oil galleys need to be cleaned. this will prevent the debris from causing you a spun rod bearing in the new engine.

2) calculate your compression ratio, if its much higher than 8.7:1 i would scrap the idea of using the 22e

3) buy some stock EJ257 rods. they are the same length and housing bore as your EJ22 and EJ20 rods, only much stronger. i think a good set could be had for 75-100 bucks.

4) consider power target. if you plan on going over 250 to the wheels, invest in forged pistons.

5) if you plan on buying forged pistons and STi rods, get a 22 because the cost of building an EJ20 is the same as a EJ22, and if at all possible use a 99-01 EJ22 block. they use the exact same crankshaft as the 205, and the WISECO EJ22T pistons can be used in it. that combo would be absolutely killer. infact if i didnt have a EJ257 laying around for my build, that is definitely the way i would have gone. unfortunatly for the cost of all that you should be able to find a perfectly good used STi shortblock.

[98legacygt22]

150 is too much for a 2.0 shortblock core.. ive seen them go for 50 bucks.

its not a horrible way to go, but you should:
1) take your heads to a local machine shop and have them looked at. its super super comon to burn exhaust valves, and crack between the seats (dont worrie about the cracks from the seat to the spark plug). also tell them you spun a rod, and the oil galleys need to be cleaned. this will prevent the debris from causing you a spun rod bearing in the new engine.

2) calculate your compression ratio, if its much higher than 8.7:1 i would scrap the idea of using the 22e

3) buy some stock EJ257 rods. they are the same length and housing bore as your EJ22 and EJ20 rods, only much stronger. i think a good set could be had for 75-100 bucks.

4) consider power target. if you plan on going over 250 to the wheels, invest in forged pistons.

5) if you plan on buying forged pistons and STi rods, get a 22 because the cost of building an EJ20 is the same as a EJ22, and if at all possible use a 99-01 EJ22 block. they use the exact same crankshaft as the 205, and the WISECO EJ22T pistons can be used in it. that combo would be absolutely killer. infact if i didnt have a EJ257 laying around for my build, that is definitely the way i would have gone. unfortunatly for the cost of all that you should be able to find a perfectly good used STi shortblock.

All great ideas! I've been chatting away with a guy on Nasioc about his wrx heads on a 22E block. He said hes been running it reliably tuned at 18-22psi on stock internals for 2 years now, he thought the rings went so he pulled the motor and it turns out it was the oil seal in the turbo that went bad. I just plan on slapping this together for now, and when I get my refund from school I'm going to probably buy a 2000 or so legacy sedan and then I will invest to do things right. This legacy is just going to be a learning experience for me for future builds and will wind up my winter beater/outdoor hobby car.

[lord flashheart]

Thats cool best way to learn is talking to knowledgable people and trying it yourself.

[EJ22D]

Ok so most of you on here have probably seen a post by me on more than one occasion. I keep changing my mind for this build. I have a set of EJ205 heads and intake which I plan on running. Now I have the option to buy an EJ205 short block with a spun bearing for $150, which I want to do but at the same time I already have an EJ22E short block that is already split, and all the internals/block are in great shape. Was thinking instead of buying the 205 short block (more money to replace the crank and rods, if the block is even use-able) that I might just run the 22E short block with maybe some aftermarket rods and pistons to handle the boost. Sorry for the millions of questions but I am about to start building and would like YOUR opinion. This is a budget turbo setup keep in mind. Also would you guys keep the 22E pistons or upgrade to a set of Weisco's?

Budget turbo build?
Keep the 22E block as there is no replacement for displacement.
You want Phase 2 internals? Now is the time to cut that 5th main to accept the 205 crank & Phase 2 rods (buying the 205 block would get you Phase 2 crank immediately.
Leave your internals alone but if you have a chance to replace/upgrade them, do so immediately.
Bolt your 205 heads/manifolds/crank gear/sensors on it & corresponding 205 hardware (all of the turbo stuff.)
You still need to get it tuned slightly to handle the extra 20% displacement safely so it doesn't run lean in higher rpms.

[lord flashheart]

Ok so most of you on here have probably seen a post by me on more than one occasion. I keep changing my mind for this build. I have a set of EJ205 heads and intake which I plan on running. Now I have the option to buy an EJ205 short block with a spun bearing for $150, which I want to do but at the same time I already have an EJ22E short block that is already split, and all the internals/block are in great shape. Was thinking instead of buying the 205 short block (more money to replace the crank and rods, if the block is even use-able) that I might just run the 22E short block with maybe some aftermarket rods and pistons to handle the boost. Sorry for the millions of questions but I am about to start building and would like YOUR opinion. This is a budget turbo setup keep in mind. Also would you guys keep the 22E pistons or upgrade to a set of Weisco's?

Budget turbo build?
Keep the 22E block as there is no replacement for displacement.
You want Phase 2 internals? Now is the time to cut that 5th main to accept the 205 crank & Phase 2 rods (buying the 205 block would get you Phase 2 crank immediately.
Leave your internals alone but if you have a chance to replace/upgrade them, do so immediately.
Bolt your 205 heads/manifolds/crank gear/sensors on it & corresponding 205 hardware (all of the turbo stuff.)
You still need to get it tuned slightly to handle the extra 20% displacement safely so it doesn't run lean in higher rpms.
No replacement for displacment... Except for volumetric efficentcy n/a ford 302ci @ 100% VE = subaru ej25 @ 200% VE. Displacement in not as relivant to power as volumetric efficentcy. Air is torque, torque is power.

Also like i said in my post. The 205 uses the exact same rods and crankshaft as the .1999 Ej22. If you want to use the 205 crank you have to have it re ground. ($120) then cut the thrust on the 22e ($200+) then 99.9% of the time when you spin a rod bearingyou have to recondition the conenecting rod or replace it. ($30-80)....i paid 75 bucks for my 99 22 short block. Its literally almost the exact same bottom end except for the is like 97mm instead of 92.5 or whatever the 205 is but they can be had for much cheaper.

[EJ22D]

No replacement for displacment... Except for volumetric efficentcy n/a ford 302ci @ 100% VE = subaru ej25 @ 200% VE. Displacement in not as relivant to power as volumetric efficentcy. Air is torque, torque is power.

I said "no replacement for displacement" regarding the 205 vs the 222 that you suggested. The 2.2 (whichever EJ22) inhales 20% more air than the 2.0 in naturally aspirated form. In a turbocharged layout, I would expect the increase to remain the same despite the increase in displacement.

[98legacygt22]

I gave up on this, figure when I do a swap I want a whole wrx to get parts from.

[lord flashheart]

No replacement for displacment... Except for volumetric efficentcy n/a ford 302ci @ 100% VE = subaru ej25 @ 200% VE. Displacement in not as relivant to power as volumetric efficentcy. Air is torque, torque is power.

I said "no replacement for displacement" regarding the 205 vs the 222 that you suggested. The 2.2 (whichever EJ22) inhales 20% more air than the 2.0 in naturally aspirated form. In a turbocharged layout, I would expect the increase to remain the same despite the increase in displacement.
Yes no replacment for displacement... Except for in terms of ve.
You can have a n/a 2.0 that takes in 2.5 liters per cycle (125% ve) or a 2.5 that takes in 2.0 liters per cycle.
(80% ve). Displacment is just a messurement of the engine. Nothing else. It doesnt mean your automatically making more power or taking in more air.
The no replacement for displacement was though up by these muscle car guys because they wont admit to 4 bangers making large power numbers. As soon as F/I comes in you can pretty much throaw your "no replacment" law out the window.

Lets take some examples.
The 4g63 for example... Its a 2.0 and i have seen one make 1130Whp. Ive heard of people hitting the 1400whp.
i know a kid putting 850 to the wheels with his vw 18t wolfsburg. Ive never herd him say " i would race that guy but he has a .7 liter over my car."
Now.. the EJ257... I personally have never seen one crack 758whp. The highest i know of was 807whp here in utah... That extra .5 liter.. And its still beat by 600whp.
Ummmm yeah im going to say there is a replacement for displacement.. Its called volumetric efficentcy.

Also compression ratio affects ve. So when you put 25d heads on your 2.2 and you dont turbo it you arnt gaining anything.
Air flow potential goes up but your not flowing any more because its a lower compression ratio.
Thats why when people put the 2.2 heads on the 2.5 block the compression goes much higher but when they go to the dyno the gain is nearly non existant.
The stock 25d does ~106whp
Hy comp hybrid does about 110whp

I think your competely nuts for putting a 22/25 low comp in your car with out the turbo.
The whole idea is to lower the compression so you can boost it safely.
My point is that phrase is a crock of shit. Leave it to the mustang and camaro guys dick measuring contests. W

[1055]

The only other solution to a low comp N/A Build I could see feasible would be if you were to spray it.. which of course; babues get bottles, real men get blown.

[lord flashheart]

The only other solution to a low comp N/A Build I could see feasible would be if you were to spray it.. which of course; babues get bottles, real men get blown.

LOL
i like this guy.

[1055]

I thought some might appreciate that.

Op if you wanna do something fun.. I have an eaton m62 I'd be willing to part ways with.. would work perfectly with what you want to do..

[EJ22D]

Yes no replacment for displacement... Except for in terms of ve.
You can have a n/a 2.0 that takes in 2.5 liters per cycle (125% ve) or a 2.5 that takes in 2.0 liters per cycle.
(80% ve). Displacment is just a messurement of the engine. Nothing else. It doesnt mean your automatically making more power or taking in more air.
The no replacement for displacement was though up by these muscle car guys because they wont admit to 4 bangers making large power numbers. As soon as F/I comes in you can pretty much throaw your "no replacment" law out the window.

Lets take some examples.
The 4g63 for example... Its a 2.0 and i have seen one make 1130Whp. Ive heard of people hitting the 1400whp.
i know a kid putting 850 to the wheels with his vw 18t wolfsburg. Ive never herd him say " i would race that guy but he has a .7 liter over my car."
Now.. the EJ257... I personally have never seen one crack 758whp. The highest i know of was 807whp here in utah... That extra .5 liter.. And its still beat by 600whp.
Ummmm yeah im going to say there is a replacement for displacement.. Its called volumetric efficentcy.

Also compression ratio affects ve. So when you put 25d heads on your 2.2 and you dont turbo it you arnt gaining anything.

Air flow potential goes up but your not flowing any more because its a lower compression ratio.
Thats why when people put the 2.2 heads on the 2.5 block the compression goes much higher but when they go to the dyno the gain is nearly non existant.
The stock 25d does ~106whp
Hy comp hybrid does about 110whp

I think your competely nuts for putting a 22/25 low comp in your car with out the turbo.
The whole idea is to lower the compression so you can boost it safely.
My point is that phrase is a crock of shit. Leave it to the mustang and camaro guys dick measuring contests. W

Normal, unmodified 4 cylinders do not produce the btq or bhp that normal, unmodified V8s do, even if they have more volumetric efficiency, because they are 4 cylinders w/low displacement.
There is no N/A EJ25 that can overpower a 5.0 in the production of TQ.
A Ford 5.0 would tear our engines apart without having to try.
Even if you did head work to the EJ25 & added a turbocharger to gain power, the same work can be done to a Ford 5.0 to make an even more powerful engine w/a better, more linear powerband & tq range.
It's the displacement & added cylinders that make V8s superior, which is why V8s are used in high end sports cars, not 4s.
They are superior in almost every way possible & this is without even mentioning the RS4 4.2L, which is smaller than the 5.0 & just about better in every way possible.

Normally, you'd be right if one were to build a DOHC EJ22 using stock parts/specs but there are instances where you can actually make more power than stock N/A EJ22s.
I'll start w/head gasket thickness & piston type, both of which come heavily into play when making a frankenstein EJ, & I'll use my DOHC EJ22s as examples.
My first DOHC EJ22 build was made w/98 25D heads & a 99 222 block that I made without the intention to turbo (it was an emergency build).
You might think, "Oh, what happened to power there?", but I made MORE power than the 222 had when it was SOHC because the heads were able to pull in more air.
Due to the CR of that build being 10:1 due to thin gaskets, like it was stock, it ended up burning more air & producing more power in the midrange (DOHC heads are apparently good for midrange power, I've learned).
The current DOHC EJ22 has a CR very close to stock but still makes more power because I've modded it to pull in more air to burn without doing head work (I also used a much thinner than stock head gasket here).
If I opened the intake ports a little more, I could get the heads to pull in more air but the low-end TQ is low as it is & I'm not trying to push all the power up top, especially in an AWD car.
Increased VE is why EJ22 guys use 25D heads or 251 heads in their turbo builds in the first place though.

As for the 22/25 build, the EJ22 intake ports need to be opened up a little more & more power/tq will be had.
Everyone knows this but very few really have the time to sit there & grind them more or have the money to get them ground more.
The 22/25 engine has a much better powerband than a normal 97-99 25D, even w/no head work, & it's low end TQ is pretty much unrivaled by the latter (96 25Ds are different as they make peak TQ @ 2800rpm).
Give them the head work they need & their potential for power will be blown wide open w/increased VE or one could put 97-99 25D heads on a 96 25D block, use a thinner than stock head gasket, & port the intake to make more power than a normal 25D.

[lord flashheart]

I'll use my DOHC EJ22s as examples.
My first DOHC EJ22 build was made w/98 25D heads & a 99 222 block that I made without the intention to turbo (it was an emergency build).
You might think, "Oh, what happened to power there?", but I made MORE power than the 222 had when it was SOHC because the heads were able to pull in more air.


do you have a dyno sheet?
or
a flowbench sheet?
because i happen to know for a fact that the 25D heads dont flow as well as the 222 or 251.
(ive seen the flow sheets.)
so please show me some data that backs your statement.

when i calculate it out, if you use, -6cc pistons (even tho the 222 is more like 9), and a head vol. of 46 of a DECKED HEAD, a clearance of .8 a custom .014 head gasket for a ej22.. i come up with 9.8:1.
those are pretty generous number too.

take a screen shot of your CR calculator. i would love to see how you came up with 10.1-1
especially on JUST A HEAD GASKET.
BTW what head gasket were you using??

hahaha what about the late 70s to early 90s mustangs? .. cuz they were rated between 165 and like 210 at the flywheel.
this isnt a question of " n/a vs F/I."
its the fact that displacement is a measurement. if you can put 200% VE to a 2.5 it will make more that your 5.0
if you want to compare V8s by all means. but comparing a turbo 22 to a turbo 20 is a joke.
again here where i live people have 1.8 liters making 800+ WHP. ive never EVER herd him say "dang that mustang has a bigger motor. im not racing him." WHICH IS AGAIN SAD, THAT A 2.5LITER SUBARU HAS A HARD TIME TOUCHING 800WHP.

CAN you make 1500HP from a 5.0? yes! absolutely! but at that point. who does that?
i have met about 50 people making 500WHP or more.. do you know how many of those were V8s? not many.

THIS IS THE POINT WHEN IT COMES TO TURBOCHARGING DISPLACEMENT IS NOT NEARLY AS RELITIVE.
WHICH IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.

[EJ22D]

I'll use my DOHC EJ22s as examples.
My first DOHC EJ22 build was made w/98 25D heads & a 99 222 block that I made without the intention to turbo (it was an emergency build).
You might think, "Oh, what happened to power there?", but I made MORE power than the 222 had when it was SOHC because the heads were able to pull in more air.


do you have a dyno sheet?
or
a flowbench sheet?
because i happen to know for a fact that the 25D heads dont flow as well as the 222 or 251.
(ive seen the flow sheets.)
so please show me some data that backs your statement.

I do my tests by physical performance.
With my current car, I have raced 5 2nd Gen N/A Legacys & 3 Imprezas, ALL of them equipped w/stock EJ22s & 1 Legacy equipped w/stock EJ222.
My car outran ALL of them once 65mph came up & kept on pulling away from them.
Is it fast? No.
I just happen to know for a fact that I built a slightly-more-powerful-than normal EJ22. Twice.
I also know that the 25D heads are a lot more aggressive than normal EJ22 heads.
The first one had a little more guts than the current one though.

when i calculate it out, if you use, -6cc pistons (even tho the 222 is more like 9), and a head vol. of 46 of a DECKED HEAD, a clearance of .8 a custom .014 head gasket for a ej22.. i come up with 9.8:1.
those are pretty generous number too.

The heads to the current engine were decked from the machine shop by the person who owned it before me after the car blew a head gasket & was repaired.
I do not know how much was taken off prior to me owning it but I'll trust the previous owner's words being that the work was done by her boyfriend, who was a Subaru tech.
I could also tell that the heads were decked when I took them off.

take a screen shot of your CR calculator. i would love to see how you came up with 10.1-1
especially on JUST A HEAD GASKET.
BTW what head gasket were you using??

For the first 25/22 combo, I used a very thin cometic head gasket & I don't remember the specs to that engine 100%.
I know that I had to do what seemed to be a lot of work at the time to get it to run & I was just happy to be able to start it up & drive it.


hahaha what about the late 70s to early 90s mustangs? .. cuz they were rated between 165 and like 210 at the flywheel.
this isnt a question of " n/a vs F/I."
its the fact that displacement is a measurement. if you can put 200% VE to a 2.5 it will make more that your 5.0
if you want to compare V8s by all means. but comparing a turbo 22 to a turbo 20 is a joke.
again here where i live people have 1.8 liters making 800+ WHP. ive never EVER herd him say "dang that mustang has a bigger motor. im not racing him." WHICH IS AGAIN SAD, THAT A 2.5LITER SUBARU HAS A HARD TIME TOUCHING 800WHP.

You keep relying on VE & more air but what are the powerbands to those engines like?
I'll tell you what they are like.
No power on the low, very little in the middle, EVERYTHING up top.
Peaky.
Very Honda-like, which makes for very boring cars until you get to triple digit speeds.
There is more than just air flow that determines performance but we already know that, don't we?

Those old 302s & 289s may have produced low power for their time but it didn't take much to get them going as they were REALLY responsive, being V8s & all.
If you opened the ports, cammed the heads, & turbocharged our EJs w/high boost , you will effectively push the power up in the rpm range to the point of being pointless to use.
At that point, it might as well be a drag car.
A good powerband is what engine building should be all about.
There's a reason why Audi's turbocharged engines have amazing powerbands w/their high level of power.
Take a good look at the RS2's turbo 5 & you'll see that it will pull hard from just about ANY rpm.

CAN you make 1500HP from a 5.0? yes! absolutely! but at that point. who does that?

Drag racers do it all the time.
Bigger engines, bigger boost, bigger power.
I'm just speaking the facts, not choosing any sides or anything like that.
If you think that a 4g63 will make more power than a boosted 5.0 Coyote engine AND have a more useful powerband, you'd have to show me how that is possible.
There are many 4cyls that are better than others, among the best would be the Porsche 3L, but comparing the power potentials between a 4cyl & V8 is just crazy.
If 4cyls were the greatest engines in the world, there wouldn't be V6s, V8s, & so on.


i have met about 50 people making 500WHP or more.. do you know how many of those were V8s? not many.

I can go to Ford dealerships & see cars that make that at the wheel w/bigger, boosted engines.
They're called Shelby GT500s.
A few years ago, Ford GTs produced that kind of power.
There is a reason those cars do not use boosted 4 cylinder engines.


THIS IS THE POINT WHEN IT COMES TO TURBOCHARGING DISPLACEMENT IS NOT NEARLY AS RELITIVE.
WHICH IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.

And I made a statement that if you were to do the same VE increase & turbocharging on a V8, that they would clearly outclass any turbo 4, no questions asked.
There are no turbo 4s producing dragster level V8 power.
Since we're still on displacement, it is known that the larger the displacement, the larger the potential for power & tq.
Subaru invented the EJ25 over the rest of the lower displacement EJs as a way of producing more power & better powerbands.
That is why there is no replacement for displacement.
If Subaru did not believe this, there would have been no EJ25.

[lord flashheart]

Lets do some lateral thinking kids. since we dont have NRHA budgets.
The argument here is no replacement for displacment right. Someone around here thinks its a about v8d vs 4cylinders so lets get back on track.

Now lets say you have a 2.5 liter
and your sitting at a light
and a 5.0 liter comes up next to you.

Now lets say both cars are the exact same weight and gear ratio.

The 5.0 has 2x the displacment. So in order to beat him... You have to make up for that. To make the same power... You need to take in the same amout of air
(are you still following)

Now lets say you have a turbine on your car that spins at 150,000rpm (lets call it a turbocharger)

Now that turbocharger spins so fast in makes its own atmospheric pressure... Say 1 bar.

now at 1bar you are takingin 2 atmospheres instead of 1. So... Instead of 2.5 liters per 2 rpm you take in 5.0 liters of air.

so in essence what you did is REPLACE the lack of DISPLACMENT.

also btw those 1500hp dragsters are blown.
Show me some N/a cars making 1500hp.
Also dragsters make closer to 8000.

air is power.
DISPLACMENT IS ONE WAY TO GET MORE AIR. FORCED INDUCTION IS ANOTHER.
FORCED INDUCTION IS A REPLACMENT FOE DISPLACEMENT.

[lord flashheart]

if you built a 22 (twice) with more power please. Show us a dyno sheet. Because the only way to know your making more power i s with a dyno with the same relitive humidity and barometric pressure. I dont want to sound like a dick but
The numbers just dont support what your saying.
As a As far as them not making low and mid rpm power... Check out the possitive displacment superchargers ,variable geometry turbos, twin scroll etc... They pretty much take a dump on most naturally aspirated tq curves.
And if you add in Varrible valve timing. Damn

on a side note..speaking of vvt.
Another cool thing to google is the tq curve of the new bmw strait 6s. They have the Flattest torque curve ive ever seen. Ever.

Again i mean everything in the best way cheers.

[EJ22D]

Lets do some lateral thinking kids. since we dont have NRHA budgets.
The argument here is no replacement for displacment right. Someone around here thinks its a about v8d vs 4cylinders so lets get back on track.

Now lets say you have a 2.5 liter
and your sitting at a light
and a 5.0 liter comes up next to you.

Now lets say both cars are the exact same weight and gear ratio.

The 5.0 has 2x the displacment. So in order to beat him... You have to make up for that. To make the same power... You need to take in the same amout of air
(are you still following)

Now lets say you have a turbine on your car that spins at 150,000rpm (lets call it a turbocharger)

Now that turbocharger spins so fast in makes its own atmospheric pressure... Say 1 bar.

now at 1bar you are takingin 2 atmospheres instead of 1. So... Instead of 2.5 liters per 2 rpm you take in 5.0 liters of air.

so in essence what you did is REPLACE the lack of DISPLACMENT.

Now lets add a turbocharger to that V8 to "level the playing field". All of a sudden, it's not very leveled, is it? The V8 will put out more power with far less boost. Why? There isn't a need for the turbocharger to be running at the high rpms it would see in a 4 banger. Both the turbocharger & V8 are far less stressed than the 4 cylinder would/could ever be. I'm not saying no replacement for displacement for nothing. 14psi +257 = okay, some power. 6psi in a 5.0 V8 = Unfair. If both cars were the exact same weight, using the exact same gear ratio, the V8 would over power the 4 cylinder. Every time. Without fail.

also btw those 1500hp dragsters are blown.
Show me some N/a cars making 1500hp.
Also dragsters make closer to 8000.

There are no N/As that can produce that kind of power, obviously, & there are still no 4 cylinders producing 8000hp. Why? Because size, number of cylinders, & displacement matters, then comes the boost.

air is power.
DISPLACMENT IS ONE WAY TO GET MORE AIR. FORCED INDUCTION IS ANOTHER.
FORCED INDUCTION IS A REPLACMENT FOE DISPLACEMENT.

Air is power if mixed with gas correctly after tuning.
I know that N/A & Boost are 2 different methods of attaining power but forced induction + extra displacement = even more power.
This is why there are stroker kits for the EJ series (up to 2.7Ls!)
Like you have said, more air = more power, right?
This is one of the many reasons why stroker kits exist for our engines, or any engine for that matter.
To maximize & increase the amount of air that can be burned for extra torque on the low end.


if you built a 22 (twice) with more power please. Show us a dyno sheet. Because the only way to know your making more power i s with a dyno with the same relitive humidity and barometric pressure. I dont want to sound like a dick but
The numbers just dont support what your saying.
As a As far as them not making low and mid rpm power... Check out the possitive displacment superchargers ,variable geometry turbos, twin scroll etc... They pretty much take a dump on most naturally aspirated tq curves.
And if you add in Varrible valve timing. Damn

I've shown the power of the 22D by outrunning other Legacys & Imprezas with stock EJ22s. Air is pretty dense & cold here, considering I'm in the NorthEast, so I have no complaints about the engine's ability to produce power under these conditions.
I can also feel the significant difference but hey, butt dynos are just about useless, right?
And what about VVT on a 4 cylinder?
From what I have seen & personally experienced with 4 cylinders, VVT opens power right at the top end.
Toyota Celica GT-S? Top end, crap for low end tq.
Acura Integra GSR VTEC? The same.
Honda Civic Si VTEC? Even worse.
I hated driving every single one of these cars in the street because if they weren't on the highway, they were just about useless.
The Altima we have is a little better but still the same so yeah, if it has more than 4 cylinders, I can see VVT being a very good factor with power gains & linear powerbands.
My old roommate's Volvo S80 had a nice pull on it when the first turbo kicked in & kept the power all the way until the 2nd turbo came on, but by then, you were doing over 100mph easily.
There is no way you could tune a turbo 4 to be as responsive or as smooth as a turbo I6, especially not a Volvo T6 or a 2JZ.
Unless magic is being performed, I just simply do not see that happening.

on a side note..speaking of vvt.
Another cool thing to google is the tq curve of the new bmw strait 6s. They have the Flattest torque curve ive ever seen. Ever.

You should check out the tq curve to the BMW M5 Twin Turbo V8 if you think their straight 6s are good.
It looks like it'll swallow up the whole rpm range with pure power.
The EcoBoost is another engine with a stupendous tq pull from any rpm.


Again i mean everything in the best way cheers.

[lord flashheart]

i am not going to even read your last post, im tired of this conversation.
its not about peak.. its about all around power.
BMW is the KING of flat torque curves.
https://sl-i.net/FORUM/images/imported/2013/01/cls63graphJPG-1.jpg