2.0 or 2.3 for highway runs?
2.0 or 2.3 for highway runs?
With the 35R which combo you think would be better for high speed runs? I dont boost much on city streets, mostly on freeways. When I do hit the gas im always above 4k rpm anyways so I dont know if the 2.3 will be better. Most of the runs are from 60-150mph...which setup best suits my driving style?
This is how I woluld drive the car if I had these mods.
Built 2.0, 8k max
2.3, 7k max.
I may lose 500 max on spool with the 2.3 but I would probably get extra 1000 rpms with the built 2.0? Will the 35R shine up to 8k or does it drop off at 7k?
This is how I woluld drive the car if I had these mods.
Built 2.0, 8k max
2.3, 7k max.
I may lose 500 max on spool with the 2.3 but I would probably get extra 1000 rpms with the built 2.0? Will the 35R shine up to 8k or does it drop off at 7k?
my bad i meant to say 8k... thats what I plan on reving the engine to. Most dynos I have seen go only up to 7k and they let off the gas. I havent seen one that showed power all the way up tp 8k...im not saying it wont I havent seen one yet.
Last edited by Derek888; Jun 4, 2006 at 10:07 AM.
Trending Topics
Originally Posted by Derek888
my bad i meant to say 8k... thats what I plan on reving the engine to. Most dynos I have seen go only up to 7k and they let off the gas. I havent seen one that showed power all the way up tp 8k...im not saying it wont I havent seen one yet.
If you're just going to keep it to 8k I wouldnt mess with the bottom end.
Originally Posted by fsugatorbait
If you're just going to keep it to 8k I wouldnt mess with the bottom end.
Derek, you've already answered your own question.
If you're interested in 60-150 mph runs, the 2.0L is probably the better choice. Why? Simply because with the properly sized turbo and properly selected supporting mods, one can stretch the power band of the 2.0L far enough to reach relatively high speeds (e.g. 8500rpm - 136mph) without shifting into an overdrive gear.
A 2.3L will be more advantageous where conditions result in widely changing speeds, where rpms will drop and quicker spool makes a difference (e.g. short course road racing).
A 2.0L will be better if racing from speeds where the engine is asked to 'stretch its legs', and quick spool isn't an issue.
To keep the torque curve from dropping off quickly despite a large turbo, one needs supporting mods that suit high rpm torque, such as a properly selected and timed cam set, intake manifold with larger plenum and shorter runners, etc.
Also, keep in mind that long runs in high gear with a high hp setup place considerable loading demands on the engine and apply a great deal of heat to those cast pistons. The decision to upgrade the rotating assembly is a good one.
If you're interested in 60-150 mph runs, the 2.0L is probably the better choice. Why? Simply because with the properly sized turbo and properly selected supporting mods, one can stretch the power band of the 2.0L far enough to reach relatively high speeds (e.g. 8500rpm - 136mph) without shifting into an overdrive gear.
A 2.3L will be more advantageous where conditions result in widely changing speeds, where rpms will drop and quicker spool makes a difference (e.g. short course road racing).
A 2.0L will be better if racing from speeds where the engine is asked to 'stretch its legs', and quick spool isn't an issue.
To keep the torque curve from dropping off quickly despite a large turbo, one needs supporting mods that suit high rpm torque, such as a properly selected and timed cam set, intake manifold with larger plenum and shorter runners, etc.
Also, keep in mind that long runs in high gear with a high hp setup place considerable loading demands on the engine and apply a great deal of heat to those cast pistons. The decision to upgrade the rotating assembly is a good one.
