Seriously? And they only added 25hp with a 20% increase in displacement?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5010 using Tapatalk

Current and future emissions/mpg regs. The ND2 miata is only getting 185hp from 2.0l and 13.0:1 comp.

I guess it is pretty close to 100hp per liter so yeah I shouldn't have expected more. At least e85 will be crazy on it

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5010 using Tapatalk

yep. It is one of the specs on the actual Subaru press release.

FIFY. Next to swapping any other engine in this car, this is cake.

20% peak horsepower you mean.

Yes compared to doing other engines it is easy. It is still not a drop in plug and play by any stretch though.
So if the "minor" differences between a 2016 and 2017 engine swap are not plug and play then trying to swap one from an even greater changed platform is going to be even more difficult. People will think because the car has the same badge it should just drop in and away they go. This will not happen.

Looking back at when the 86 was released, everybody thought the WRX FA20DIT would be to go-to performance swap for our cars. Seven years later, and -AFAIK- nobody's got it to work properly.

These FA24s might very well be the same story. Can it be done? Of course. Does it make any sense vs. a low-boost supercharger kit that's known to work? Probably not.

That's also a byproduct of running DI. You can crank up the compression ratio (and thus efficiency) without concern for knock, even if you're not looking for maxxxx hp.

Would make no much sense, would be better selling the car and starting with an uodated platform (including chassis).

I would say that the FA24 from accent would make more sense.

All low end torque designed for low revs and a CVT tranny. For all intents and purposes a truck engine designed for heavy vehicles. The paper HP and torque numbers look nice but in a sports car application that version of the engine would suck balls.

lol @ truck engine. I'd still like to see it.

Me with low end tq::burnrubber:

All torque you say? [emoji848][emoji848][emoji848]

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5010 using Tapatalk

If anybody was going to do this swap (if it is even feasible as Alex pointed out above) then they would be better off to wait and see what they do to this engine series for the WRX/STI.
Wouldn't change the issues of the swap but may at least be worth doing.

People have done the FA20F swap, but it is an inferior engine, so there is no reason to swap the motor. It has lower compression, so it can take more boost on pump gas, but it takes more boost to make power. The rods are only slightly stronger, but generally, 350hp is around the max target. The turbo system is mounted under the engine, so there is likely some type of interference issues unless the engine is mounted higher. It might require an aftermarket turbo system anyways. Then the starter is on the opposite side of the engine, so I think some custom work would need to be done to mount the transmission. It makes more sense to just install an aftermarket turbo system, so this is why swaps aren't common.


For the FA24, there is more low end torque, there will be more power potential, it likely has stronger internals for more reliability at a given horsepower or a higher power potential, it will spool a turbo faster, etc. The cost of a swap could be cheaper than building a piston/rods motor FA20, and it might have an improved power curve.


If the motor has the same dimensions, but is just bored out larger, or rather, it has larger sleeves then the block might possibly be matted to the FA20's heads with some minimal head work to open the chambers. We don't know yet.