thecarguy Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 i would like to build a ea82 hybrid. i have a 1986 ea82 carburetor. if i put ea82 turbo heads on my stock short block then have a duel Webb set up will this be worth doing? and dose anyone know which cams are bigger turbo or N/A... if there is a difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralDisorder Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 Nope - not worth doing. The EA82 is a terrible platform from which to start doing performance mods. Look into the EJ22 swap. Cams are different between turbo and non but you wouldn't want a turbo grind for a performance NA block. Delta Camshaft can do a "torque" grind but again - why bother starting with an 84 HP dead platform? Just go to the EJ22 and get 135 right out of the gate. Then for the same $ your torque grind goes farther..... if you even need to bother. GD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quidam Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 i would like to build a ea82 hybrid. i have a 1986 ea82 carburetor. if i put ea82 turbo heads on my stock short block then have a duel Webb set up will this be worth doing? and dose anyone know which cams are bigger turbo or N/A... if there is a difference. Something to consider here is the effective compression ratio. A 9.0:1 carb block @7psi boost will have an effective compression ratio around 13.3:1. Generally, you would need a stand alone spark box, like an MSD unit and run pig rich on fuel/air mixture. High octane fuel required. By the factory service manual the cam lift is the same between carb, spfi, and mpfi turbo. I don't know about duration. The turbo cams have different intake and exaust valve timing. You would want to use the turbo cams should you try this. The turbo cams intake opens earlier and closes later than the carb/spfi cams. 4* and 2*. The turbo cams exhaust opens earlier and closes earlier than the carb/spfi cams. 7* and 1*. GD has stated that one of the main reasons he hates the EA-82, is that he's pissed Subaru didn't use that R and D on the EA-81. Dead platform? That's not realistic as people all over the world are still driving them. Doug Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralDisorder Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 Dead platform for a performance build. Sure people are still driving them around in stock form. Nothing wrong with using them up if they are still on the road. They are just a pain in the rump roast in so many ways.... GD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecarguy Posted October 2, 2011 Author Share Posted October 2, 2011 the EA-82 couldn't have been that bad. it did well in the 1986 Safari rally. if anyone has info on the car that would be great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaki Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 (edited) Believe me,the other board members who have posted in this thread before me know their stuff! I used to think the same as you about those EA82Ts(though your post also mentions EA82?),even posted something a couple of years back(see below)...until I experienced real problems,followed by total consecutive failures in my RX Coupe.My cousin(board member name Soobydoo had similar issues...he is now chasing an EJ22T swap!)...so after a while I decided to pursue an EJ22 swap...cant seem to find time due to hectic business and travelling schedule, may just find someone here on the board to do it and just pay them(if they dont feel insulted by getting paid to do it:grin:). Anyways,when well maintained...EA82T will give you decent performance but when the problems start,they truly start! BTW,I personally know Mike Kirkland of the Safari Rally Subaru fame(very decent man...worked for him briefly years ago when starting out in the safari business, and I also know several other guys who worked as Subaru Service Crew(equivalent of the PitCrew in Daytona/Indycar stuff).From what I have been told,those engines that they ran back then are not basic stock like what me and you may have had in our EA82Ts...they have different mods and also use different fuel altogether to withstand that kind of beating and abuse.See part of my post below from 2 years ago: "....Definitely true that the 1.8 liter turbo engines are problematic/less reliable than their successors.But lets not forget that they were fully tested to the maxx when Subaru entered the Kenya Safari Rally,to counter the Audi Quattro and the Toyota Celica.For those not familiar with this rally,it has been the proving/testing ground for mainly Japanese and European auto makers for many decades(since the '50's)....at one time called the East African Safari Rally.If I remember correctly,Dodge entered the RamCharger in either '81 or '82...." Edited October 4, 2011 by kaki corrections Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecarguy Posted October 9, 2011 Author Share Posted October 9, 2011 just so every one knows my ea82 is na I do not want to turbo my ea82. the na ea82 carb motor in my car has single port heads. the turbo or port injection xt4 na have duel port heads. i would like to run individual carburetors on the my ea82 with the turbo heads and modified xt4 intake manifold. in theory this should improve throttle response like nobody's business and greatly improve mid range. with the use of a turbo distributor for a greater timing advance. and what ever happened to the 1986 Subaru rally car anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecarguy Posted October 9, 2011 Author Share Posted October 9, 2011 and thank you guys for the opinions and info. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralDisorder Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 Why not just drop in an EJ22 (you can get a whole first-gen Legacy donor for about $500 or less these days) and get 135 HP without all the monkey business? And then if that's not enough you can substitute an EJ25 bottom end and increase displacement and compression under the EJ22 heads - resulting in about 180 to 190 HP. You'll never come close to this with an EA82 of any flavor. Even a dual carb or a turbo. I congradulate your enthusiasm..... and I've been involved with builds like your's. They eventually end up with some kind of fuel injection setup in the end anyway. Carbs are just too primitive and troublesome - getting them setup for doing one thing really well invariably results in reduced performance under other circumstances. FI has none of the drawbacks and many, many advantages over a carb setup. GD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roostema4328 Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 ^yes X1000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecarguy Posted October 10, 2011 Author Share Posted October 10, 2011 ok i do understand the ea82 is considered inferior to ej20 or greater and that the ea82 will never be a ej. i live in socal where my Subaru is very rare and never seen i used to work for a Subaru dealer in riverside ca as a tech. if i wanted a ej i would buy an ej or an Impreza. however i now run a online parts store with a friend ksdengineering.com and i see this as great way to do something a little different with a car not seen to often here in riverside. ive owned plenty of carburetor cars and have only been stranded once because of it being a carburetor.....that sat for 11 years and never been rebuilt or cleaned before.:-p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecarguy Posted October 10, 2011 Author Share Posted October 10, 2011 if i get my car up to 110-145 hp or a really nice 0-60 mph ill be happy my other car is a race car anyway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quidam Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Something to consider is the valves. NA EA-82 has stainless exhaust valves and regular intake valves. They have a backcut, two angle deal at the valve head. The turbo head has both valves stainless and they weigh quite a bit more. I'd use the NA valves with your setup. I just ported a set of dual ports and there is room for improvement there. At least a pocket port casting flash removal/port match. I spent about 15 hours grinding on them and a custom intake. Still have to polish and all ports are in the range of 41 mm plus or minus. There is meat where the headbolts and lash adjuster casting intrudes into the ports that can be safely cut down... I'll try to get a pic. Doug Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecarguy Posted October 10, 2011 Author Share Posted October 10, 2011 that good to know thanks ill save my valve out of my na ea82 has any one monkeyed around with bigger valves? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quidam Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 (edited) I've done some work to improve the surface around the spark plug area and I need to unshroud the valves a little more. I finish those ports off with ball hones. It will take three different sizes to do it and the three will do both heads. I lowered the floor and raised the roof in these D ports. At the gasket, it's a full 2". I'm going to need a carbide burr with a 6" shaft to finish these heads. I've been using three inch. Number one and three Intake ports aren't as good as the other two because of spark plug clearance. I did what I could with them. Here's a problem. Camshafts. It looks to me like I can get possibly another 1 mm plus lift with reground cams. I just don't know what they cost right now. I want all the lift I can stuff into it. Doug Edited October 11, 2011 by Quidam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quidam Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 that good to know thanks ill save my valve out of my na ea82 has any one monkeyed around with bigger valves? I haven't but the standard for remanufacture/high performance is 1 mm over. If you used them it would be best to unshroud the valves in the combustion chamber. If I'm not mistaken, RAM engines sells 1 mm over for these. Doug Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quidam Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 Why not just drop in an EJ22 (you can get a whole first-gen Legacy donor for about $500 or less these days) and get 135 HP without all the monkey business? And then if that's not enough you can substitute an EJ25 bottom end and increase displacement and compression under the EJ22 heads - resulting in about 180 to 190 HP. You'll never come close to this with an EA82 of any flavor. Even a dual carb or a turbo. I congradulate your enthusiasm..... and I've been involved with builds like your's. They eventually end up with some kind of fuel injection setup in the end anyway. Carbs are just too primitive and troublesome - getting them setup for doing one thing really well invariably results in reduced performance under other circumstances. FI has none of the drawbacks and many, many advantages over a carb setup. GD Here's a quote from NASOIC: It's a EJ251 shortblock with a cobb balenced crank, stock rods & pistons, and a sti oil pump. Capped off by EJ22e heads, port and polished, delta torque cams. 98 hp and 107 ft-lbs a stock 07 2.5i on this dyno reads 93 hp and 98 ft-lbs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralDisorder Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 Here's a quote from NASOIC: It's a EJ251 shortblock with a cobb balenced crank, stock rods & pistons, and a sti oil pump. Capped off by EJ22e heads, port and polished, delta torque cams. 98 hp and 107 ft-lbs a stock 07 2.5i on this dyno reads 93 hp and 98 ft-lbs There are many conditions that can affect dyno readings - not the least of which is engine management - which with the 251/253 bottom end is problematic because of the extremely high compression of nearly 12:1. The 25D is much more tame at around 10.5:1 and thus more condusive to stock engine management - not to mention safer. Most of the failures have occured with 251/3 bottom ends. The dyno information that I have seen indicates about 185 crank HP with the 25D bottom end and Delta torque cams. It sounds like a lot but in reality it's only a 20 HP gain over the stock 25D (and, incidentally - only about 10 HP more than your quote above - but again I beleive poor management is to blame with the much higher compression of the 251/3 piston choice). And that's simply a quote from a forum. I have read many different quotes from many different forums. I have also built and run them personally. The benefit to them is in their low cost to build and higher than stock power output. Reliability, performance, and inexpensive..... hard to beat frankly. Irregardless - it's more than any EA82(T) is going to make. GD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gloyale Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 98 hp and 107 ft-lbs a stock 07 2.5i on this dyno reads 93 hp and 98 ft-lbs I assume these are At the Wheel HP numbers, but still.......why so low? An stock EA82 makes 90 hp? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecarguy Posted October 12, 2011 Author Share Posted October 12, 2011 you know GD if i wanted a lots of power for cheap I've got a LS1 i could drop in my Subaru. i think its 371 hp i bought for $1200 used turn key ready 45,000 miles. i know it works i pulled out of the corvette it was in. its not about making power, its about owning a unique car that not seen to often (here in southern California) and just making it even more unique with out sacrificing its original heart & soul. not saying its not super cool doing a ej swap just not for me right now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralDisorder Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 I understand what you are saying..... I would port and polish a manifold and put a Weber 32/36 on it. More carb than it will ever need. Dual-carb is interesting but at the end of the day it's just a lot more work than a two-barrel progressive and for not a lot of gain. You would be surprised at how much you can awaken that little engine with just a simple DGV carb..... assuming you don't have to pass any kind of emissions laws with it. That's one big benefit of the engine transplant in CA - you can have it smog ref'd and you can actually legally drive it with a frankenmotor because it will have all factory smog equipment in place. GD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecarguy Posted October 12, 2011 Author Share Posted October 12, 2011 the bar out here is impossible to deal with Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralDisorder Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 the bar out here is impossible to deal with Well - there are people on this board that have done it. Perhaps in other locales in CA - they have swapped in newer engines and as long as all the factory smog equipment is in place they can be smoged as if they were the newer car from which the engine came. The laws of the state allow this and with enough prodding and pokeing I'm sure the local officials could be made to do their job. GD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quidam Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 (edited) you know GD if i wanted a lots of power for cheap I've got a LS1 i could drop in my Subaru. i think its 371 hp i bought for $1200 used turn key ready 45,000 miles. i know it works i pulled out of the corvette it was in. its not about making power, its about owning a unique car that not seen to often (here in southern California) and just making it even more unique with out sacrificing its original heart & soul. not saying its not super cool doing a ej swap just not for me right now Well as you can see, EJ intrudes into seemingly EVERY conversation where the topic is EA-82. This is not the "ULTIMATE" board for this. If I had time I'd create one. Just the facts kind of deal and on topic for those who want to know. Anyway. Your proposed setup. Right off the bat you're giving up 7 psi cranking compression not using SPFI pistons. If the compression isn't up to snuff on the motor, I won't bother with a performance build. That's what the whole engine is designed around, what happens in the combustion chamber. Dual carbs need a hot cam, higher compression a, and the ability to turn high rpm to make use of them. Your motor will turn 7K all day long if you want it to. I'm putting together a motor and I've done some thinking about the cams, because at this point, what I can get will dictate how I build the rest of the motor. There's Delta and possibly Ram as far as I know. I'm not ready to buy so I haven't called them. I need to physically check piston to valve clearance before I do. I looked at the FSM and did some measuring. It looks like stock cams have about .396 Lift, NA and Turbo. Turbo duration is 250*, NA duration is 244*. You asked about the Turbo cams in your setup. I'm pretty sure Gloyle in this thread has ran them in a NA motor. The exhaust timing events are more different on the exhaust than the intake. I don't have centerlines yet and not sure if there is any downside to it. I did some more measuring and it looks like .464 ish is the max lift at the valve that can be installed in the cam carrier. With a lot more duration that's still not a "wild" cam. I have experience with 10.0 to 1 compression and .292* 490* on the street and it's not undrivable. Not in a Subaru tho. Anyway, just some thoughts. Doug P.S. Edit. I love my roller cam, roller rocker LS:). The cams. I've worked out a cheap way to make adjustable cam sprockets. I'll order the parts soon. I'm talking twenty bucks and some time kind of deal. That would help with your motor. Add some torque or horsepower, depending if you retard or advance the cams. I don't have any hope of finding higher ratio rockers tho to increase lift. Doug Edited October 13, 2011 by Quidam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quidam Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 I've never looked at the Spider manifold but the gaskets for it measure 37mmX41 and I like the shape for ports. I've got ports 44mm minimum as it stands in the heads. So, two carbs, what would you choose? Doug Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.