2.3 vs 2.0 with graphs!!!
Nov 29, 2005 | 01:51 PM
#16
Originally Posted by evodave
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
Nov 29, 2005 | 01:59 PM
#17
The 2.0L doesn't start making the same torque as the 2.3L until 7k+ RPMs. For a race car with weight penalties in mind, and a built motor that can rev, then the 2.0L is the way to go. But when you start taking into consideration drivetrain/syncro wear (from high RPM use), engine wear, drivability, fun factor, area under the curve, I'd take the 2.3L any day for a street car.
Nov 29, 2005 | 05:20 PM
#23
Smoggy,
Here you go man
Here you go man
Originally Posted by TopSpeed
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.
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.
Nov 29, 2005 | 06:02 PM
#24
Awesome graph - thanks for doing the comparo.
The 2.0 indeed did make slightly more power but god damn, the driveability and fun factor of driving the 2.3L car far outweighs that extra power of 7000rpm. IN fact, if both did a roll-on race from 4k the stroker would pull much harder and in fact, I dont know if that 2.0s extra power could even make up for it!
Damn it I want a stoker so badly.
The 2.0 indeed did make slightly more power but god damn, the driveability and fun factor of driving the 2.3L car far outweighs that extra power of 7000rpm. IN fact, if both did a roll-on race from 4k the stroker would pull much harder and in fact, I dont know if that 2.0s extra power could even make up for it!
Damn it I want a stoker so badly.
Nov 29, 2005 | 07:22 PM
#25
Evolving Member
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
From: In my house
Originally Posted by TopSpeed
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
Doug
Nov 29, 2005 | 07:38 PM
#26
Questions:
1. This is a stroker kit right? Not a 2.4 4g64 block right?
2. Who owns the 2.3 with 35R?
3. What 2.3 kit does he run? Buschur's or AMS'?
I am awestruck by it's similarities to my car's power and curve.
1. This is a stroker kit right? Not a 2.4 4g64 block right?
2. Who owns the 2.3 with 35R?
3. What 2.3 kit does he run? Buschur's or AMS'?
I am awestruck by it's similarities to my car's power and curve.
Nov 29, 2005 | 08:21 PM
#30
you could easily rev that 2.0 to 9k & have just as wide of a power band than the stroker!!!
also the tq curve on the stroker falls off quick & the 2.0 is nice & flat i kinda like the 2.0 hp & tq curve. the .63 ar probably doesn't help the stroker though.
thanks for posting that up..
also the tq curve on the stroker falls off quick & the 2.0 is nice & flat i kinda like the 2.0 hp & tq curve. the .63 ar probably doesn't help the stroker though.
thanks for posting that up..