Can a Wiseco 2.3L Pistons Use for 2.2L?
May 26, 2015, 04:25 AM
#1
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
Can a Wiseco 2.3L Pistons Use for 2.2L?
Hi Guys,
need advise as can a Wiseco 2.3L pistons use for 2.2L match with 156mm rods with 94mm crank?
Thanks
need advise as can a Wiseco 2.3L pistons use for 2.2L match with 156mm rods with 94mm crank?
Thanks
May 26, 2015, 04:59 AM
#3
Evolved Member
not on a g63 block
May 26, 2015, 09:41 AM
#6
EvoM Guru
iTrader: (1)
You would need 153mm rods with the 94mm crank to use them. English Racing offers the R&R rods in 153mm. Your compression would also be about one point lower than advertised. So if you got the 10.5:1 comp pistons, you'd be at about 9.5:1
May 27, 2015, 09:22 AM
#7
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
Omg...Thanks Guys as i thought it should have the same combination for the 2.2L built bcos 2.3L stroke is 100mm with 150mm rods but since the 2.2L crank stroke is 94mm and the rods length has increased to 156mm.
So sad that the 2.3L Wiseco pistons cant be use on a 2.2L built with 156mm rods on a 4G63 block
So sad that the 2.3L Wiseco pistons cant be use on a 2.2L built with 156mm rods on a 4G63 block
Trending Topics
May 27, 2015, 11:00 AM
#9
EvoM Guru
iTrader: (1)
"I have an ultra high compression height piston that sits on my desk as a reminder of why I dont question "the rule".
Aaron"
That is what JohnBradley (Aaron at English Racing) had to say when I asked him about the compression height of that CP piston for 94mm crank and 156mm rods. There is a reason English only uses a 153mm rod with the 94mm crank in the 4g63 block.
Aaron"
That is what JohnBradley (Aaron at English Racing) had to say when I asked him about the compression height of that CP piston for 94mm crank and 156mm rods. There is a reason English only uses a 153mm rod with the 94mm crank in the 4g63 block.
May 27, 2015, 11:53 AM
#10
"I have an ultra high compression height piston that sits on my desk as a reminder of why I dont question "the rule".
Aaron"
That is what JohnBradley (Aaron at English Racing) had to say when I asked him about the compression height of that CP piston for 94mm crank and 156mm rods. There is a reason English only uses a 153mm rod with the 94mm crank in the 4g63 block.
Aaron"
That is what JohnBradley (Aaron at English Racing) had to say when I asked him about the compression height of that CP piston for 94mm crank and 156mm rods. There is a reason English only uses a 153mm rod with the 94mm crank in the 4g63 block.
May 27, 2015, 12:42 PM
#11
EvoM Guru
iTrader: (1)
It is due to the short compression height, regardless of stroke/rod length. Aaron didn't divulge what "the rule" is. But he doesn't recommend the short compression distance of that piston. I'm sure they have good reason for it seeing as how they had R&R build them custom 153mm rods to run the 94mm crank in the 4g63 block for their 2.2SLR engine.
May 27, 2015, 07:49 PM
#12
I am building a 2.2 right now for myself using 147mm rods. I can choose from many 2.0 pistons with this rod length.
stock 2.0 rod ratio = 1.7
2.3 with stock 150mm rod = 1.5 ratio. (been running these for ten years with great results)
2.2 w 147mm rod = 1.56 ratio. (same ratio as 156mm long rod 2.3).
153mm rod 2.2 = 1.62 ratio. nice ratio as well. but choosing 2.3 pistons for a 2.2 sucks. the resulting compression ratios suck. as the pistons are dished for 2.3 volume. better to use 150mm rod and pistons made for 94mm stroke. or like I am doing 147mm rod and 2.0 pistons
if you are building high rpm power 6000-9000 rpm a long rod is preferred.
if you are building a street car with power that hits at 4000rpm a short rod is preferred.
stock 2.0 rod ratio = 1.7
2.3 with stock 150mm rod = 1.5 ratio. (been running these for ten years with great results)
2.2 w 147mm rod = 1.56 ratio. (same ratio as 156mm long rod 2.3).
153mm rod 2.2 = 1.62 ratio. nice ratio as well. but choosing 2.3 pistons for a 2.2 sucks. the resulting compression ratios suck. as the pistons are dished for 2.3 volume. better to use 150mm rod and pistons made for 94mm stroke. or like I am doing 147mm rod and 2.0 pistons
if you are building high rpm power 6000-9000 rpm a long rod is preferred.
if you are building a street car with power that hits at 4000rpm a short rod is preferred.
May 28, 2015, 09:47 AM
#13
EvoM Guru
iTrader: (1)
I am building a 2.2 right now for myself using 147mm rods. I can choose from many 2.0 pistons with this rod length.
stock 2.0 rod ratio = 1.7
2.3 with stock 150mm rod = 1.5 ratio. (been running these for ten years with great results)
2.2 w 147mm rod = 1.56 ratio. (same ratio as 156mm long rod 2.3).
153mm rod 2.2 = 1.62 ratio. nice ratio as well. but choosing 2.3 pistons for a 2.2 sucks. the resulting compression ratios suck. as the pistons are dished for 2.3 volume. better to use 150mm rod and pistons made for 94mm stroke. or like I am doing 147mm rod and 2.0 pistons
if you are building high rpm power 6000-9000 rpm a long rod is preferred.
if you are building a street car with power that hits at 4000rpm a short rod is preferred.
stock 2.0 rod ratio = 1.7
2.3 with stock 150mm rod = 1.5 ratio. (been running these for ten years with great results)
2.2 w 147mm rod = 1.56 ratio. (same ratio as 156mm long rod 2.3).
153mm rod 2.2 = 1.62 ratio. nice ratio as well. but choosing 2.3 pistons for a 2.2 sucks. the resulting compression ratios suck. as the pistons are dished for 2.3 volume. better to use 150mm rod and pistons made for 94mm stroke. or like I am doing 147mm rod and 2.0 pistons
if you are building high rpm power 6000-9000 rpm a long rod is preferred.
if you are building a street car with power that hits at 4000rpm a short rod is preferred.
a 10.5:1 2.3 piston in a 2.2 makes the comp ratio around 9.5-10:1. perfectly acceptable for E85 use..
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
riceball777
Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain
8
Dec 27, 2012 04:50 PM
joeymia
Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain
5
Jun 8, 2005 08:54 AM