There has been alot of debate on which is better, the 2.3 or the 2.0 block. Today I got the chance to test both. These graphs are from two different cars with the exact same mods except one is a 2.3l stroker and the other is 2.0.

Mods for both cars include, buschur intercooler and intercooler piping, full-race manifold with gt-35r, buschur alky kit, 272 cams, stock intake, and throttle body, buschur turbo back exhaust, and aem ems that I tuned.

Only difference in the two are displacement.

Run#11 is from the 2.0L block 28psi pumpgas and alky injection.

Run#12 is the 2.3L stroker again at 28psi with alky injection.

You can see that the stroker spools the turbo about 1500rpms quicker that the 2.0L, but doesn't make as much power up top.

 

That is amazing information. Thanks for posting .

Can I add something? who makes the 2.3 block? Why does the 2.0l makes more power up top, does it rev higher than the 2.3 l ?

Thanks!!

 

Now that is some neat info. I think another problem with the strokers is one, how much power can they take and two, how high can they rev.

Considering the two fastest 4G63 powered cars have 2.0's in them it makes you think.. and go ahead and add the the fastest Evo is also a 2.0 (Even though they do have a stroker also for it). There is obviously reasons for it and I think you just showed one of them on a piece of paper! I love to see this type stuff... hard data.

 

That is awsome. I was trying to decide if if i wanted a 2.0 or a 2.3. The torque is so much better with a stroker. I would give up 15 hp for 83 ft-lb of torque.

 

I always find the analogy of the European 2.0L STI and the US 2.5l engine. Despite the USdm having a 2.5 l engine the much more refine, high revin engine eats the 2.5 l alive in all the test: roll acceleration, acceleration from a stop, the 2.0l can squeeze more power with same mods.

 

We built the 2.0L, but I am not sure who's kit the 2.3 was. There are many reasons why the 2.0L makes more power up top than the 2.0L. I would think that if these cars had ported heads or sheet metal intakes the curves would look alot different. However both these cars had stock intakes, stock heads, stock throttle body, which my have been hurting the flow needed for a 2.3L..... but thats only a guess.

Doug

 

Also how do you like full-races products? And do you need a slim fan with their manifold?

 

Oh hell yeah, me too. Torque is more valuable to me than HP. I rather have as torquy engine than anything else.

 

holy *****! look at the difference between the two at 4.5-5 rpm. insane!

 

Yeah but look at the torque!!!!! I think the 35R and stroker are perfect together, but anything bigger a 2.0 is better, you just run out of RPM's with the stroker and bigger turbo.

 

+1

 

I love using the full-race products any chance I get. Their products are awesome and
I have never had any issues with fitment or cracking from their manifolds. Both cars were equiped with slim line fans in order to clear the turbo and inlet pipe to the turbo.


Doug

 

Nice compare! Great job!!

 

good info...but the tq seems low on the 2.0L for sure.... should be more like 440-455 lb/ft at least according to what i am used to seeing and my personal car...was this race or pump gas for the stroker? Do these cars have a .63 a/r ?

 

Doug,

That is Sweet man, nothing like hard data to show the facts. Give me a call whenever you are not busy .