2.2L VS. 2.5L Please! Help Me Decide On My Rebuild

[turbovanman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Barron well stock its a rocket off the line but starts over 3K cruising at 65mph. 2.76 sounds like a good compromise.

Agreed, sounds like a good compromise, I would like to try 2.76, as the reason I tried the .91 gear sets was my freeway rpm is stupid, around 3700 ish at 75 mph,

[The Barron]

I am not good at transmissions nor will I PRETEND to be, BUT let us indilge in a THEORY for a sec...

The trans in the baron right now has the electronic lockup option,the auto in the 600 does not. The valvebody in the baron is fubared or something cause it will in no way respond to the kickdown.

#1 FIX the current n/a a413 so it works like its suppose to.. then..

IDEA. Install 5 clutches in it and the shift kit from MP perf. or do the home made jobbie.Keep it stock 2.78 ratio or swap to 2.76. Then down by the shifter install a little push button for the lockup.

Anyone here done that?

[turbovanman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Barron I am not good at transmissions nor will I PRETEND to be, BUT let us indilge in a THEORY for a sec... The trans in the baron right now has the electronic lockup option,the auto in the 600 does not. The valvebody in the baron is fubared or something cause it will in no way respond to the kickdown. #1 FIX the current n/a a413 so it works like its suppose to.. then.. IDEA. Install 5 clutches in it and the shift kit from MP perf. or do the home made jobbie.Keep it stock 2.78 ratio or swap to 2.76. Then down by the shifter install a little push button for the lockup. Anyone here done that?

That will work, just upgrade all the cluthes to the turbo design, replace and weld up the planetarys. I was going to do that but then the new torque converter to take the abuse was aprox $250 more than no lockup. I wouldn't recommend using the n/a lockup converter for any length of time, different-lower stall speed and the lockup won't take the boost for very long.

[moparzrule]

Who is voting for just 2.5???

[The Barron]

errmmm.. 5 people!

People who want things to run smooth I guess.

[moparzrule]

If you want smooth buy a honda, I like the way TD's have the rough idle. I can actually tell when the engine is running.

[86Shelby]

Quote:

Originally Posted by moparzrule If you want smooth buy a honda, I like the way TD's have the rough idle. I can actually tell when the engine is running.

Rough idle? My engine only idled rough after I hurt a piston with not enough fuel. It was idling glass smooth beforehand. 2.5 with no balance shafts.

[The Barron]

It seems to be luck of the draw. Some people have had it kinda vibrate alot but most havent.

[moparzrule]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 86Shelby Rough idle? My engine only idled rough after I hurt a piston with not enough fuel. It was idling glass smooth beforehand. 2.5 with no balance shafts.

Did you ever try to start it even when it was running because you couldn't tell?

[The Barron]

Quote:

Originally Posted by moparzrule Did you ever try to start it even when it was running because you couldn't tell?

Thats something for old/deaf people to do.. or socker moms..or wives or incoherent people.

I have NEVER sat in a 2.2/2.5 chrysler..and a lot of 4cyl domestics and couldnt tell it was running. And us with the EXHAUSTS we run.. man you'd have to have a MAJOR buzz on to not know it was running.


MY car with 3" billet, 4" tail pipe and light sound proofing.. well... you figure it out.

[86Shelby]

Actually, yes I did try to start it while it was running.

[DirectConnection]

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Barron I am close to the build. I am VERY torn here.. I have an 87' 2.2 engine here I can take the crank out of and I have to bore the block and buy pistons anyways. My car is an 89' Lebaron Coupe. Its going to have a: 5 clutch a413 /w shift kit. I'll be running between 14-16Psi with a T2 spec setup and 2.5" exhaust /w 3" billet muffler. (possibly be installing 5th injector and run 18psi) >I CANT REALLY AFFORD FORGED PISTONS< This will be mostly a cruiser Car will encounter more highway races than stoplight races. I am lightening the car up as much as I can. I run Pizzas & 205/60/15's. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is the last time I'll bother people with this question. _________________ 1989 LeBaron Coupe|2.5L Turbo I Auto Under Restoration..and then some! http://www.cardomain.com/memberpage/420349/1

I am more of a fan of the 2.2 when speaking in terms of HP potential... but since your car is going to be an automatic, I would go with the 2.5 for it's increased torque which will help throttle response and be less lagy.
What I don't understand is that you want an auto for mainly highway races? 5-speed with a 2.2 would be the better choice then.

[turbovanman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by moparzrule Who is voting for just 2.5???

I am one of them, guess I got unlucky with my first motor as it shook the steering column at idle, way worse with the a/c on. I do alot of stop and go and it was so annoying, I don't mind a bit of vibration but this was too much. My new new engine has them in and nice and smooth, acceleration and engine revability don't seem affected but I am just seating the rings.

[Tim_K]

All these responses, and NOT ONE person has brought up the issue of "What if a 2.5 had some top end work?".

An 8 valve 2.2 may have more top end than a 2.5, but we seem to be comparing engines with stock heads and exhaust manifolds. In other words, the same air flow capacity with increased displacement. In that case, it doesn't take a genius to see that a 2.5 will drop off earlier, because its flow requirements aren't being met.

To compare things to RWD Mopars, why has no one (at least, no one with half a brain) ever put stock 318 heads on an otherwise well built 340 or 360? Because the heads have smaller ports and simply can't feed the engine enough fuel/air and get the exhaust out.

I say that with a fairly well ported head and exhaust manifold, and perhaps a .63 turbine housing, a 2.5 can pull as hard or harder than any similarly built 2.2.

A 2.5 has 13.3% more cubic inches to feed than a 2.2, so to have a fair comparison, the head on the 2.5 must flow 13.3% more than the 2.2 head.

Stroker cranks have become popular in both big and small block Mopar V-8's in the last few years. Why? Because they produce a lot more low and mid range power, and they drop the hp peak rpm. You don't have to kill the engine by winding it to over 6000 rpm to get decent hp numbers.

An unrelated story:

Last week at the dragstrip, I saw a Honda Civic running mid 13's at 105. I looked at the car, and the kid told me all about it. It was an N/A setup, with head porting, big cams, headers, and all that. It was a B18 engine, and he said he was shifting it at 9700 rpm! And he said he had $6000 in the motor and related parts to make his 2100 pound car go that fast! A 9700 rpm chainsaw engine!

I have a total of about $1725 in my 89 2.5 automatic Turbo Spirit. 3110 lbs racing weight, 13 psi intercooled boost, 5400 rpm shifts, and I was getting high 14's at 91. That $1725 includes $800 to buy the car, $500 to build a good 413, $150 in a 2-1/2" exhaust, $25 for a G valve, $250 for a T2 radiator / intercooler, and miscellaneous other costs.

Getting the car off the line without blowing away the tires is a problem, but the torque is so much fun on the street!

[moparzrule]

Tim-k- The reason no one said that is quite obvious, if you did the exact same thing to a 2.2 it can still rev 1000 RPM higher than a 2.5. The ONLY reason a 2.5 could rev the same as a 2.2 is if they were very unevenly matched.
quote from you-
''I say that with a fairly well ported head and exhaust manifold, and perhaps a .63 turbine housing, a 2.5 can pull as hard or harder than any similarly built 2.2.''

Same thing done to a 2.2-1000 RPM more power band.
And guess what else, that honda probably isn't making much more HP than you, but he runs a FULL second faster in the 1/4 because of his RPM band. Also, this thread was meant for this to be a STREET car, you are the only one to change that.