2.6L EVO - every been done in the usa

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Apr 24, 2008 | 07:14 AM

#31

SBR JSO

Former Sponsor

iTrader: (1)

Joined: Jan 2008

Posts: 52

Likes: 0

From: Pennsylvania

Our shop evo has a 2.5L in it now. It makes a ton ot torque! I it ever goes we may end up going to a 2.6L.

Apr 24, 2008 | 09:45 AM

#32

Barrie@D-C-Y

Thread Starter

Newbie

Joined: Nov 2007

Posts: 17

Likes: 0

From: UK

sbr

what type of torque is it producing on what turbo etc etc ? would be interesting to know

Apr 24, 2008 | 10:41 AM

#33

robertrinaustin

Evolved Member

iTrader: (5)

Joined: Dec 2003

Posts: 1,858

Likes: 0

From: Work - New York, Alaska, Mexico or the Caribbean. -Home - Tx Hill Country

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barrie@D-C-Y

sbr

what type of torque is it producing on what turbo etc etc ? would be interesting to know

Yea, let's here some more details about the 2.5.

Apr 24, 2008 | 01:35 PM

#34

bogge junior

Newbie

Joined: Apr 2007

Posts: 23

Likes: 0

From: Sweden

Here is an 2.6L evo from sweden

http://www.zatzy.com/projekt/319768-...tme-700hk.html

Apr 24, 2008 | 01:39 PM

#35

MrEvo2nv

Newbie

iTrader: (15)

Joined: Nov 2007

Posts: 95

Likes: 0

From: Enfield , CT

Quote:

Originally Posted by diablo2184

why is it not extreme?

the 4g64 is a bored 4g63 is it not? as you increase the size, you are thinning the walls and making it weaker.....i think thats right. please correct me if i am wrong, but i think im somewhat on the right track.

and both the 4g64 and 2.4+ size engines shouldnt really go past 8k. the pistons are moving too fast and heat up too quickly, so high RPMs are not good on them.

No the 4g64 and 4g63 bore is pretty much the same . The 4g64 as a taller deck height aka the cylinders are longer.

Apr 24, 2008 | 01:54 PM

#36

Forrest Gump 9

Evolving Member

iTrader: (19)

Joined: Oct 2006

Posts: 474

Likes: 0

From: #1 Land

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burklow

Not that I know of. I feel it is really too much displacement for a 4 cylinder. Possible bore and stroke for a 2.6? I wouldn't go north of 2.3 with this engine IMHO.

Toyota have a 2.7L 4 banger.

This is definitely an extreme build. I don't see the point of it thought. Most of the high HP Evo are 2.0-2.2L. If you really want something wicke for the road course, you can always get a well built, proven 2.0L engine and have your tranny build with really tall gears.

Apr 24, 2008 | 02:00 PM

#37

SBR JSO

Former Sponsor

iTrader: (1)

Joined: Jan 2008

Posts: 52

Likes: 0

From: Pennsylvania

We have some dyno sheets around here somewhere. Ill see what I can dig up.

Apr 25, 2008 | 11:42 AM

#38

Barrie@D-C-Y

Thread Starter

Newbie

Joined: Nov 2007

Posts: 17

Likes: 0

From: UK

low down torque and response is the key and what we should have in the end product .

I have a 2.16 stroker now to be exact , and rev to 7000rpm with it - dont need anymore because that also has awesome spool up and this one should be even better but just produceing more power with the bigger turbo and displacement

Barrie

Apr 25, 2008 | 11:56 AM

#39

Barrie@D-C-Y

Thread Starter

Newbie

Joined: Nov 2007

Posts: 17

Likes: 0

From: UK

Quote:

Originally Posted by bogge junior

Here is an 2.6L evo from sweden

http://www.zatzy.com/projekt/319768-...tme-700hk.html

Looks a nice build , i just cant read it

Apr 25, 2008 | 12:04 PM

#40

playmajohn

Evolving Member

iTrader: (6)

Joined: Feb 2006

Posts: 190

Likes: 0

From: Long Island

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ Brett B

do they sleeve the 4g64 stroker? 2.6L sounds wicked, especially with a meth'd out green or HTA gt3076.... holy TORQUE!!!!!!

for real it might be that torquey that it can burn out!

Apr 25, 2008 | 12:08 PM

#41

scorke

Evolved Member

iTrader: (18)

Joined: May 2003

Posts: 5,192

Likes: 0

From: Nj

Quote:

Originally Posted by diablo2184

Your not on the wrong track just......derailed. 4g64 has a 86.5mm bore with a 100mm stroke, the 4g63 has a 85mm bore and a 88 mm stroke ,the main difference has to do with the significant increase in stroke, thinning the walls 1.5 mm will make it weaker, how much so I am unsure.

Your comment about why you cannot rev these motors that fast is due to the change in the dynamics of having a significantly different stroke/rod length combination, and has NOTHING to do with pistons heating up too fast.

Scorke

Apr 25, 2008 | 01:23 PM

#42

kreionic

Evolved Member

iTrader: (14)

Joined: Apr 2006

Posts: 2,258

Likes: 0

From: MD/ NY

Not an evo but a an 2g. My buddy just got a 2.4 and He said he order the crower stroker making it a 2.6. I am pretty curious on how that turns out myself

Apr 25, 2008 | 02:13 PM

#43

SBR JSO

Former Sponsor

iTrader: (1)

Joined: Jan 2008

Posts: 52

Likes: 0

From: Pennsylvania

New Update. We are putting a 40R on the 2.5L evo tonight. It will be a few days before we get it tuned buy as soon as we get graphs I will post them up.

Apr 25, 2008 | 02:44 PM

#44

ozlookalike

Newbie

Joined: Nov 2007

Posts: 17

Likes: 0

From: Copperas Cove, Texas

from what I read before, Crower says that their 2.6l stroker will rev freely to 9500+rpm...that is however, dependent on the head setup.

Apr 25, 2008 | 05:34 PM

#45

robertrinaustin

Evolved Member

iTrader: (5)

Joined: Dec 2003

Posts: 1,858

Likes: 0

From: Work - New York, Alaska, Mexico or the Caribbean. -Home - Tx Hill Country

Quote:

Originally Posted by SBR JSO

New Update. We are putting a 40R on the 2.5L evo tonight. It will be a few days before we get it tuned buy as soon as we get graphs I will post them up.

Will it be a twin scroll set up?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ozlookalike

from what I read before, Crower says that their 2.6l stroker will rev freely to 9500+rpm...that is however, dependent on the head setup.

That's nuts. I've never heard anything like that. Can you post where you read that. Not calling you out, I'm just curious.

Reply Share

First
Prev
3 / 5
Next
Last