TheSamba.com :: View topic

Sat Dec 03, 2011 11:30 pm

90,91 and 94 for sure. There is a spot you can put the cams to close all the valves but you would have to have REAL good carma to brake the belt right in the sweet spot.

could be wrong but i thought the xt 6 cylinder was the only non-interference motors?.

Sun Dec 04, 2011 12:46 am

Nope, the early 2.2's were non interference. My 95 is also non interference

Sun Dec 04, 2011 9:25 am

Quote: the '99 is the best 25D block because it's actually a 253 with 25D pistons. 8 bolt bell-housing, 52mm rod journals, and #5 thrust bearing. It's the ultimate 25D. So building a frankenmotor with the 2.2 heads and intake is best done on the 97 to 99 blocks with the '99 being the strongest.
A '99 2.5 out of what- legacy, forester, impreza? I think the '99 forester is phase 2- is the phase 1 ideal?

Sun Dec 04, 2011 1:28 pm

I know the 99 Forester is NOT a DOHC motor where the 99 Outback is a DOHC.

Jeff

Sun Dec 04, 2011 1:44 pm

Correct, it is SOHC. What is needed phase 1 or phase 2 for the frankenmotor?

Sun Dec 04, 2011 2:02 pm

you can use either from what I read. The differences is the final compression ratio depending on deck height, piston, rod length.

It sounded like the one guy was using 2.2 rods.

They also talk about the early 2.5DOHC having smaller rod journals so I would guess you need to match different crank, rods and pistons to get the best results.

I remember 1 guy was using STI internals in an older bock on his.

Jeff

Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:31 am

I stand corected. Iv been told the early 2.2 (per96) are none interference motors. I did have a 2.2t that had a valve hit because of a belt jump. I was told the 2.2s should be able to loose a belt with out bending the valves.?? Maybe the lift is a little higher on the turbos?

The early 2.5s had smaller rod bearings and shorter rods. The 2.2s and phase 2 2.5s used the same rods. Up untill 2008, the stis had the same size and after they got an extra MM in lenth. I am goning to use the longer rods in my 2.2, shave 1mm off the forged 2.2 pistons raising the chamber 10cc and putting the 2.5 SOHC heads off a 2001 with delta cams.

jcl

Mon Dec 05, 2011 2:55 pm

The pre-97 2.2's ARE non-interference motors (even the 22T), all DOHC (except EG33) are interference.

To confuse things a bit more - there were some Phase 1.5 motors in 99... these were Ph1 blocks with SOHC heads. ohh fun!

If you are diving INTO the short block, there are at least a few more things to know/look for. For instance the early cranks had the thrust bearing at a different spot (#3 vs #5 - or something like that), and the berforementioned rod bearing differences... nothing that can't be overcome (you can machine the case for the later thrust bearing location). Some of the later cranks had additional oiling ports on the crank as well - not sure when this started.

You can search out the 2.34l builds for more rod/crank ibnfo <- but this is getting too far off topic here I think. confusing enough as is.

I would keep it simple and use a complete SB - no need to get into the internals unless it is a rebuilder. But NA EJ25 blocks/motors are CHEAP already - get a decent one and drop your heads/intake on and go.

I'll still probably go with a Sti (EJ257) SB to get the lower static compression with the low volume EJ22 heads. Torque machine!!!

Wed Dec 07, 2011 9:06 am

Franklinstower wrote: I just came home with a 97 2.5 block. no idea of the condition of the block other than the guy i got it from said it needed a head gasket. I am going to start cleaning it up, pull the heads etc. Although My Honey Pie just gave me quite the to do list before I can start any more engine projects. The appeal of all that torque is what really intrigues me.

Paul

very interested to hear how this goes. Did you decide to change the cams? The USMB guys sure like the Delta option, but I really want to hear about someone's actual frankenmotor experience IN a van. Also, from the numbers given by GeneralDisorder, i wonder what the increase in hp/trq is from the 2.5 shortblock or shortblock + torque cams. and how cheap was the 2.5 shortblock? Thanks for any comments.

Wed Dec 07, 2011 9:52 am

I'm really excited about this option too. The 2.2 OBDI has always been my favorite conversion, but never really enough for a syncro westy here in the mountians.

I'm curious if this franken motor will suffer much in MPG? I know nothing is free, but I'd rather avoid SVX gas mileage. BTDT :wink:

Wed Dec 07, 2011 9:59 am

Escorial Syncro wrote: I'm really excited about this option too. The 2.2 OBDI has always been my favorite conversion, but never really enough for a syncro westy here in the mountians.

I'm curious if this franken motor will suffer much in MPG? I know nothing is free, but I'd rather avoid SVX gas mileage. BTDT :wink:

What is your current gas mileage by the way?
Thanks :P

Wed Dec 07, 2011 10:05 am

ALIKA T3 wrote: Escorial Syncro wrote: I'm really excited about this option too. The 2.2 OBDI has always been my favorite conversion, but never really enough for a syncro westy here in the mountians.

I'm curious if this franken motor will suffer much in MPG? I know nothing is free, but I'd rather avoid SVX gas mileage. BTDT :wink:

What is your current gas mileage by the way?
Thanks :P

If you are asking about SVX syncro westy gas mileage, I no longer have that van, but it used to be right around 15 MPG with the more pricey 93 octane gas.

Wed Dec 07, 2011 12:01 pm

Yep, other folks I know have reported ~15mpg with the SVX (EG33)

My Wolfsburg weekender with EJ22 gets 21-22mpg on road trips (loaded) around the mountains here in CO.
And much like Escorial Syncro (Joel right?), I long for a bit more torque in the van here in the land of high altitude (and big climbs).

Thu Dec 08, 2011 12:06 am

Escorial Syncro wrote: ALIKA T3 wrote: Escorial Syncro wrote: I'm really excited about this option too. The 2.2 OBDI has always been my favorite conversion, but never really enough for a syncro westy here in the mountians.

I'm curious if this franken motor will suffer much in MPG? I know nothing is free, but I'd rather avoid SVX gas mileage. BTDT :wink:

What is your current gas mileage by the way?
Thanks :P

If you are asking about SVX syncro westy gas mileage, I no longer have that van, but it used to be right around 15 MPG with the more pricey 93 octane gas.

Oh,ok,I thought you had a 2.2L syncro westy :oops:

Thu Dec 08, 2011 7:23 am

ALIKA T3 wrote: Escorial Syncro wrote: ALIKA T3 wrote: Escorial Syncro wrote: I'm really excited about this option too. The 2.2 OBDI has always been my favorite conversion, but never really enough for a syncro westy here in the mountians.

I'm curious if this franken motor will suffer much in MPG? I know nothing is free, but I'd rather avoid SVX gas mileage. BTDT :wink:

What is your current gas mileage by the way?
Thanks :P

If you are asking about SVX syncro westy gas mileage, I no longer have that van, but it used to be right around 15 MPG with the more pricey 93 octane gas.

Oh,ok,I thought you had a 2.2L syncro westy :oops:

I used to have a 2.2 in a syncro westy as well, that mileage always seemed to be above or close to 20 mpg. Seemed to go forever on a tank relatively speaking. That van had 27" tires on 14" rims btw.

Thu Dec 08, 2011 10:22 am

Thanks 8)

Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:32 pm

So to be clear, no one actually has one of these STI blocks iwth EJ222 heads on it IN their van yet?

Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:13 am

^^Not in a VAN (that I know of), but there are several running around in early model Subarus (that came with the ej22).

The WRX/Legacy GT short block is another option (although new it costs the same as the sti SB)
wrx/LGT = EJ253
Sti = EJ257

The EJ253 will yield a slightly lower static compression as it has different pistons.

The NA blocks yield the highest compression, but people have run them without issue. A used NA block would be CHEAP.

I don't doubt that franklinstower will have one running quickly - he's like that it seems 8)

Sat Mar 31, 2012 9:50 pm

Has anyone takin apart a small car "cali special" Engine, as that seems to be what we are talking about here...

Sat Mar 31, 2012 10:37 pm

It would be nice if someone would measure and document the volumes of the EJ253 pistons crowns and the early EJ22 head combustion chambers. Putting together the crossbreed motor should be straightforward, but I'm curious what the actual compression ratio would be.

David