2G 600hp Street 2.2l Destroker 2.3 Stroker or 2.0?

[wing3r09]

Been pondering the thought of building a 2.2l Destroker for my 99 gst that I will also be swapping to AWD.

The Reason for the idea is just something that I do not see a lot, actually never seen. Ive read that with the destroked engines you can rev crazy high, but is there a trans that can handle shifting this high?

Plans for the car include Big turbo, E85 (10:1 or + CR) , and 600hp. The reason for 600 is just because i want it (Street beast for my pleasure). The car will not be a DD but a weekend warrior on the street. So Is a 2.2 a good idea, or would a 2.3 be a better option, or should I just pitch the idea of stroking/de stroking the engine and stick with my 2.0 now.

To build the 2.2 below is what I found i would need, and in the same thread is the 2.3.
2.2 Destroker

Standard Specs:
Stroke: 94mm
Factory Bore: 86.5mm
Rod Length: 156mm
Wrist Pin Height: 1.248"
Displacement: 2209cc or 2.2L
Rod/Stroke Ratio: 1.65
Piston Speed @ 1,000RPM: 10.27 FPS

Pro's: More displacement than a 2.1 Stroker with equal rod ratio and piston speed.

Con's: Expensive due to the crank and rods.

Notes: None

 

[wing3r09]

Will keep checking threads and share my thoughts here as well.

 

[tenn-gsx]

For a street car the 2.3 would make more torque which is what will make it more pleasurable to drive. Plus you get all that low end grunt meaning you don't need to rev to the moon to make power. Your turbo will spool faster, and you won't have to spend so much on a clutch and other components needed to rev higher RPMs and still shift.
Downfall to the 2.3 is higher rod angles putting more stress on the sides of the cylinders and less rpm capability with the equivalent parts for any of the other engine builds.
In the end it really depends on how you drive and what your real goals are for the car.
But a 2.3 will typically be the most street friendly out of them all. Simply because of the power coming sooner and the added torque through the whole powerband.

 

[wing3r09]

Thanks for the input tenn!
With the 2.3 it's more displacement, but so would the 2.2, so wouldn't all the torque and power in the lower end be there in the 2.2 as well?

 

[tenn-gsx]

I would think it should be similar but it's a different rod and crank combo which affects torque as well. But if they aren't similar in price why spend extra for a higher revving less torque producing engine? Unless you want the high revs.
Keep in mind that the extra torque at lower speed/rpm is hard on transmissions.

 

[wing3r09]

Thats a good thing to keep in mind about the trans, the reason the 2.2 destroked is appealing to me is that I don't see a lot of people building something like that. My buddy has a 2.3 stroked EVO8 and keeps recommending the 2.1l 2.2l ds, because you can take them higher up in the rpm, so on the street he complains that he runs out of rpm due to his stroker.

Will it be easier to make 600hp on 2.3l or 2.2l destroked.

The 2.3 is starting to talk to me as far as being more cost effective, and maybe more torque as you were saying tenn. Wish there was more threads about the de-stroked 2.2.

 

[tenn-gsx]

I honestly have zero experience relating to the 2.2 or 2.1. Just the 2.3. And a 2.3 can be revved to 8.5-9k if built properly.
All my knowledge on the smaller two is based off of what reading I did 5-6 years ago when I was building my last setup.
I really don't see how a 2.3 is a disadvantage on the street. The torque is there and if you run out of rpm just shift. I mean how fast do you plan to be going on public roads anyway?

 

[wing3r09]

I really don't see how a 2.3 is a disadvantage on the street. The torque is there and if you run out of rpm just shift. I mean how fast do you plan to be going on public roads anyway?

Never thought of it that way, I guess it's all where your turbo power band is at and taking full advantage of the turbo. I am leaning towards the 2.3 for many reasons discussed in this thread.
Low end power is what I am after and the added stress on all my parts trying to shift at 11k just doesn't seem worth it.

 

[Jerzm3]

For your power goal, you don't need a huge turbo. 9 years ago when i built my 1st 2.3, i made 520awhp on 22psi on pump gas with only 22psi. I was running a true garrett gt3582R. Once i sold my car to a guy in Denmark, he turned up the boost to 26 or so and made 613. I did my faur share of destruction with the 2.3 tho, sheared crankshaft, sheared trans input shaft, sheared rear diff in half, multiple axles, rear diff covers. I continued to build them, as they are super fun. My current 2.3 is spooling up my pte 6466 at 4500 rpms, again 20psi for now. Im waiting for precision to rebuild the turbo so i can turn it up. Not trying to scare you in destruction, but just be aware. I love the power band of the 2.3, like others said, you can run these higher, if the motor is properly built, mine always ran 8500rpms.

 

[jery1234]

I rev my 2.3 @ 9k for past 3 years with no problems .

 

[wing3r09]

Thanks for the Input guys! I really do appreciate it. All those broken parts just seem to come with the power that I want. :/ Its the name of the game though.

 

[Xeiros]

You'll be hard pressed to find many people that have built/are currently running 2.1's or 2.2's. Considering the ease of doing a 2.3 compared to the others, thats pretty much why. It's a shame though, as I've been trying to dig around on those two engine configurations myself as I'm curious if one of them might be that good middle ground between a 2.0 and the 2.3 thats not going to chew up transmissions running high HP.

 

[91 GSX]

The benefit of a 2.1 or 2.2 destroker would be a fast reving motor with a very high rpm limit. Sounds great, but running 9500 to 10,500 rpm's is also hard on the transmission/drivetrain/electrical and about impossible to shift a stock manual trans/clutch reving that high. Also need to modify the oil system to not starve the motor reving that high. A kiggly hla with a larger oil pan may suffice in some conditions, but a magnus dry sump kit is about $5000.00

 

[wing3r09]

Bringing my thread back from the dead. Just want to see if anyone else has any input on the 2.2l destk (4g64 Block / 63 head).

 

[Canadian_CD9A]

There's a few on EvoM, I believe.

 

[wing3r09]

There's a few on EvoM, I believe.

Ill have to take a look over there, thanks!

 

[Archer Fabrications]

The 2.3 will break transmissions very easily. I'm personally rebuilding my motor a 2.0 long rod for the extra rev saftey. Itll be easier on the trans also.

 

[92GVR4SC]

Go auto trans, and you should have few issues with a 2.3 stroker. Auto tans can handle more power, and can shift faster than a manual.