Originally Posted by homemade wrx

a 4g63 can be stroked to just under 2.4L...
a 4g64 does allow for a longer rod ratio at the same stroke and compression height in comparison to the 4G63...
the AMS 2.3RR can be made for less than they sell if for, of course, how do you think they would make money otherwise.
I should know, I'm gathering the parts for a similar but bigger build right now in a 4g63, 102mm stroke instead of 94mm. 1.470:1 RR instead of 1.638:1 RR simply because its a street engine. If running a 4g64 than the ratios could roughly be 1.53:1 @102 or 1.70:1 @94

These numbers still leave a little more room in compression height too.

Originally Posted by Ackerson

I've been building engines for 10 years, I know exactly what it takes to put together this short block. I'm not claiming to be better than anybody else, I'm just saying I have the experience to know what it takes to do this.
You don't have to preach rod to stroke ratio, and piston speed to me, I've done the math, just like most other engine builders have. It goes much deeper than just those two things. You have to consider side load, piston dwell, the forces acting on the main and rod bearings, where to locate the ring pack, etc, etc, etc. I'm not going to "write a novel".

Like I said AMS isn't the first shop to build this engine., it's been done in the Dsm community for years. You can call up any of the major pistons manufacturers, and they will have a piston for this application, or something very very close. Building the same engine with equally strong parts for half the price, doesn't make it inferior. If you buy this engine you're paying $5000 for the shortblock and $3000 for the AMS name.

Instead of getting defensive and jumping on the bandwagon, grab a calculator, write down the parts needed to make this work. Add the cost of machine work and labor, and you'll see exactly what I'm talking about.