NotLurking Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 1993 Legacy Ej 2.2 phase 1 heads, intake and computer on a Phase 2 EJ2.2 block? Hi this may seem like a stupid question, to which I have found no no answer... Presumably because anyone thinking of changing their shortblock would want to go UP in displacement in the process, hence all the 2.2 to 2.5 frankendiscussions... I have an unusual situation because California emissions require that I use an EJ22 block and pre-94 emissions (OBD 1) for my Vanagon conversion. I am building an "as new" motor, to last many long years and have purchased a factory Phase 2 Ej22 crate short block and have had the Phase 1 heads rebuilt and a valve job performed to use as a basis. A 1993 Legacy L donor car and will supply the heads & all the intake & emissions systems as required by CA.. Are there any special considerations to using the phase 1 2.2 heads on the phase 2 block? Specifically: I am aware that the compression will go up and that the engine becomes an interference motor. Have done a test build of the long block, and timing, and everything goes together fine, Intake manifold lines up correctly, etc... BUT... are there any "special" considerations?? Phase one, or Phase 2 head gaskets usable?? or modifications to either? Tweaks or other considerations to correct for the higher compression? (the motor is self adjusting but, to what limits?) Thanks!!! the project: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairtax4me Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) Use phase 1 head gaskets. The coolant ports on the heads are different between phase 1&2 and the gasket needs to match the heads. Plus the phase 1 composite gaskets just work better. Fel-pro gaskets are the same as OE for the 90-98 2.2 at half the cost. 93 will have the tappet style cams and rockers. You can swap those for a set of roller rockers and matching cams from a later year to free up some extra power. 95-96 if you want to keep hydraulic lash adjusters. 97-98 if you would like solid(screw-type) lash adjusters. There's a minor power advantage to the solid adjusters because of reduced drag on the camshaft while the valves are closed. Get re-ground cams from Delta and you'll make a few more horses too. Edited August 6, 2015 by Fairtax4me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotLurking Posted August 6, 2015 Author Share Posted August 6, 2015 Scooberoo, Thanks for those gasket insights... I used the factory phase 1 gaskets, which looked to be the right thing, because I purchased the whole OEM engine kit out of an abundance of caution. I understand the valve seals and other essential seals last longer if OEM. Any insights on the compression question? The ECU will adjust for knock, but... should I just run 91 octane to be sure? Best NotLurker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotLurking Posted August 6, 2015 Author Share Posted August 6, 2015 (edited) OOPs, I meant thanks, Fairtax4me! Just noted your cam and rocker insights... we are talking relatively small gains? I assume less than 5 HP? Do the compression bump and coated pistons take this from 130 up to the phase 2's 140 HP? Understand that I'll be ecstatic to make the leap from the VW's 85-90 HP to just 130! Thanks, again! Edited August 6, 2015 by NotLurking Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairtax4me Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Shouldn't be a big deal. I don't remember the exact difference in compression between the two, but it's not like you're going from 9:1 to 11:1. If you notice any pinging (probably won't) then you might try switching to the next higher grade fuel. Running premium is overkill though unless you have it tuned to really need it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotLurking Posted August 6, 2015 Author Share Posted August 6, 2015 Ha! That's Cool!! Been pumping "required" 91 octane into my Vanagons for the last 18 years. Can you believe... VW built these without a knock sensor!!! Thankfully, Subaru engineers stepped up and built a proper H-4! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccrinc Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 The 1990-'96 EJ22 engines were 9.5:1 compression ration. 1997-2002 EJ22s are all 9.7:1 compression ratio. The early ones were designed to run on regular unleaded, the '97-up on mid-grade. You shouldn't ever have to go over that. Emily Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotLurking Posted August 6, 2015 Author Share Posted August 6, 2015 CCRINC, thanks for the compression and fuel requirement info... Saving a little bit per gallon using mid-grade sounds good to me! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairtax4me Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 About $0.60 per gallon more for premium over regular here. A couple of the high end stations are closer to $0.70. No knock sensor is no excuse! My old Ford ranger didn't have a knock sensor. Neither did any of my other American cars built pre-1990 for that matter. Saab had turbo engines with no knock sensor that use a really neat (expensive) ignition system that detects the conditions that can create knock before it happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotLurking Posted August 6, 2015 Author Share Posted August 6, 2015 Wow, that's big difference... Out here in CA I think its closer to maybe 20-30¢ difference, but then all of our gas is often a buck more than the rest of the country. No, no excuse at all, I agree... They just never did the development work... The wasserboxer was simply a rehash of everything that preceded it. But with water. Hello! Distributors, caps, rotors, etc? Prehistoric failure prone parts. I am a longtime VW owner, (from the days when every car had those mechanical ignitions) but for a 1990 model it is inexcusable to not have electronic ignition and knock sensing. Hello, how about a MAF??? nope, instead, a crappy "airbox" with a flap hooked to a non-replacable rheostat that wears out in the idle position. On the other hand, while the VW Vanagon ECU is notorious for going bad, I was surprised when I took my legacy apart to get the harness and ECU loose. Subaru was so confident in their ECU that they buried it under the dash in a place that requires dismantling the car to get it out! Happy to be moving up to a Subaru H-4 and making a good Vanagon great. Thanks, everyone for your kind assistance! 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.