MY04 Liberty GT - FrankenStien - EOI welcome / FS

[dr20t]

The blocks are sleeved using a ductile iron casting pressed into the alloy ej257 block.

I will be using the same block just honed to suit new custom forgies, custom rods to increase capacity to 2.2 litre and the stock crank. Fit dowels and new case studs, Re balance and blueprint the whole thing, 625 headstuds, tomei gaskets with fusion ring and voila - done

A reputable rally guru in the uk uses these blocks for group c rally cars -

Mick

[<GB>]

The blocks are sleeved using a ductile iron casting pressed into the alloy ej257 block.

I will be using the same block just honed to suit new custom forgies, custom rods to increase capacity to 2.2 litre and the stock crank. Fit dowels and new case studs, Re balance and blueprint the whole thing, 625 headstuds, tomei gaskets with fusion ring and voila - done

A reputable rally guru in the uk uses these blocks for group c rally cars -

Mick

I seen that they were but theyre not that strong.

[dr20t]

You don't think that setup above will handle 35psi?

[<GB>]

I have my doubts, I base this on reading other forums and there builds

it might last a little while but why would you want a ticking time bomb

[dr20t]

Which other builds?

I'm not aware of anyone else pushing one of these blocks?

You're probably confusing them with a normal ej207 or even ej257

[bigBADbenny]

O ring head for that setup?

[<GB>]

Which other builds?

I'm not aware of anyone else pushing one of these blocks?

You're probably confusing them with a normal ej207 or even ej257

im talking all Subaru build engines not one specific yeah a few are 2.5 but honestly the guys in the states are doing pretty big builds for 600awhp and that's on there high reading dynos that could be 600-700 here easy and some are having issues with heads lifting or the heads warping due to big head bolts when torqueing them down. theyre a good designed block don't get me wrong but im comparing yours to guys with sleaves and block supports, I just don't see it lasting

[<GB>]

PROVE ME WRONG

[KiDo_Tuning]

PROVE ME WRONG

422kw on a stock block 09 2L, still stock rods and crank but has new bearings otherwise would classify as stock bottom end with lots of abuse. GRB 6MT 2L gear ratios taken into account for power curve and turbo choice

JDM yO

[<GB>]

PROVE ME WRONG

422kw on a stock block 09 2L, still stock rods and crank but has new bearings otherwise would classify as stock bottom end with lots of abuse. GRB 6MT 2L gear ratios taken into account for power curve and turbo choice

JDM yO

Links are useful....
id say it wouldn't last long

and has it been down the qtr?

[dr20t]

You're missing my point gb

These blocks are different. The pistons are different (and not just the material or diameter), the rods and rod ratio are different, and the crank is completely different

If i did the above id be upgrading the "weak" parts (and I say that conservatively), being the pistons, rods and bolstering the block. The head studs do not need to be oversized. Arp 625 hold 480,000psi of pressure. At combustion that is roughly 1000hp at the crank on a 4 cylinder. So they will hold the heads down

The USA builds are shocking. Look into them further. I'll point out se of the differences already :

- the blocks themselves - casing and cylinder strength. The ribbing too.
- the pistons - including skirting length, gudgeon pin location and ring land positioning
- the rods - forged and rod ratio is different
- crank - spec c is double cross drilled, nitrided and heat treated forged crank, then again balanced
- piston to deck height, quench area, piston velocity at peak rpm and peak torque (peak cylinder pressure and VE)
- other clearances including piston to bore clearance and rod/ main bearing clearance

The biggest problem in my theory / opinion is this : the guys building "big" builds always use parts made for the ej205 or ej255/257. All of these engines are different to the ej207, especially the spec c grb ej207.

So they're strengthening the block (arguable again due to tolerances in machining of these things in the states - proven by how short they last after being built - rubbish tolerances and machine work). Once they apparently strengthen the block they throw pistons in designed for a shit rod ratio and rod angle at high rpm, with a decent crank (ej257 nitrided but still not double cross drilled), but then still subjecting the engine to bad rod ratio, bad piston to deck height, bad rod ratio, bad piston skirting length and pin positioning, bad configuration altogether

The ej207 really is that much better - yes I'm a fanboi - but for good reason. Ask anyone who's been in my car how smoothly and effortlessly it revs to 8500rpm. And I realize its not all about revs - but the overall "package" just works

That's why I have faith that fixing the little weaknesses, which are mostly related to material strength than design flaw, such as pistons and rods, whilst bolstering the block's ability to hold together, will allow a good platform to build big power from.

And as will all big performance engines, it won't last forever. But I don't see why if looked after and doesn't encounter a "hiccup" that it won't last for 50,000kms. That would be plenty for me at those power levels.

Mick

[senator]

You're missing my point gb

These blocks are different. The pistons are different (and not just the material or diameter), the rods and rod ratio are different, and the crank is completely different

If i did the above id be upgrading the "weak" parts (and I say that conservatively), being the pistons, rods and bolstering the block. The head studs do not need to be oversized. Arp 625 hold 480,000psi of pressure. At combustion that is roughly 1000hp at the crank on a 4 cylinder. So they will hold the heads down

The USA builds are shocking. Look into them further. I'll point out se of the differences already :

- the blocks themselves - casing and cylinder strength. The ribbing too.
- the pistons - including skirting length, gudgeon pin location and ring land positioning
- the rods - forged and rod ratio is different
- crank - spec c is double cross drilled, nitrided and heat treated forged crank, then again balanced
- piston to deck height, quench area, piston velocity at peak rpm and peak torque (peak cylinder pressure and VE)
- other clearances including piston to bore clearance and rod/ main bearing clearance

The biggest problem in my theory / opinion is this : the guys building "big" builds always use parts made for the ej205 or ej255/257. All of these engines are different to the ej207, especially the spec c grb ej207.

So they're strengthening the block (arguable again due to tolerances in machining of these things in the states - proven by how short they last after being built - rubbish tolerances and machine work). Once they apparently strengthen the block they throw pistons in designed for a shit rod ratio and rod angle at high rpm, with a decent crank (ej257 nitrided but still not double cross drilled), but then still subjecting the engine to bad rod ratio, bad piston to deck height, bad rod ratio, bad piston skirting length and pin positioning, bad configuration altogether

The ej207 really is that much better - yes I'm a fanboi - but for good reason. Ask anyone who's been in my car how smoothly and effortlessly it revs to 8500rpm. And I realize its not all about revs - but the overall "package" just works

That's why I have faith that fixing the little weaknesses, which are mostly related to material strength than design flaw, such as pistons and rods, whilst bolstering the block's ability to hold together, will allow a good platform to build big power from.

And as will all big performance engines, it won't last forever. But I don't see why if looked after and doesn't encounter a "hiccup" that it won't last for 50,000kms. That would be plenty for me at those power levels.

Mick

Stop pissing in the wind and get some cosworth billet heads

[KiDo_Tuning]

Keeping in mind Mick's car made peak power on its last dyno run at under 6000rpm due to the exhaust choking it. So consider 20% more RPM(7200rpm) for peak power and even keeping torque at the same level as old tune that is 360kw on lowish boost. If torque held to 8000rpm then on 22psi it would hit 400Kw.

27psi at 8000rpm and suddenly 400+ is achievable.

RPM is the easiest multiplier in the power physics formula

[<GB>]

mick,

I know how good these blocks are mainly from your posts and some research I did into them to see the block differences, they look are stronger yes but I just don't see them being that strong maybe I doubt it a bit or you over estimate ha ha

I don't see why you bag the usa builds or machine shops they cant be that bad surely some of these guys have built a fair few engines and know a thing or too, I think you assuming a bit here, if anything they would have better machine shops than we do or more of them

as far as the head studs from reading they seem to think the heads are flexing when torqued down I dunno maybe the liners move

most of the oiling issues these cars have in the crank are fixed when they put cosworth or other brand cranks in

you should try prove me wrong happy to admit im wrong if you can get it to 400-450awkw for 20,000+km


matt I know how power is calculated I have done schooling out side of forums ha ha

can you please supply a link to this car you speak of?

[kiahatsiu]

USA shops all seem to build engines that are only good for 300kw at the wheels in Aussie, then claim 550hp..Stock 255 cases with entry level H beams, good bearings, CP pistons and aftermarket cams in stock heads a 550whp engine doth not make. These build threads make little to no mention of improvements in oiling, and, when people do get excited they go with cosworth parts, which for all intents and purposes are H beam rods with similar length and weight (and shape) to the Manley/Eagle/Et Al, and heads that look amazingly similar to the Spec C heads. They then try and spin this contraptions to 8500 rpm.
I quake in fear whenever I hear of someone trying to run over 310kw at wheels with ye olde H beams, and I am going to be one of these people soon.

Ps, I am basically saying what Mick said, just in more layman's terms and using brand names. I have not moved the conversation forward at all. Hah.