Likely the first FA2/4 hybrid incoming

[all4spl]

Just reached out to my Dealer connect to see if I can assist with this build for you.

[cactus]

Originally Posted by Tatsu333

A post in the Harrop superchargers thread made me think of this - how about an FA24F block swap? Do the cooling passages, etc. line up between the FA24F block and the FA20D heads?

You could likely find a wrecked Ascent and get the block from that. To regain compression for the NA application, you'd need custom pistons OR maybe longer rods (which would improve the rod-stroke ratio as well...unless the lower compression in the Ascent is achieved with more cylinder head volume vs. shorter pistons or rods).

I don't want to see the 2.4L 1st gen dream die!!! LOL

Turbo motors had the starter mounted differently and the case half wont accept the BRZ starter with the stock trans.

[Tatsu333]

Originally Posted by cactus

Turbo motors had the starter mounted differently and the case half wont accept the BRZ starter with the stock trans.

[FrickingReallySlow]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

I think you would need to either do a custom adapter, custom bellhousing, or you would need to machine a relief into the block or cut and weld the bellhousing swapping the starter relief to the other side. Most likely a custom adapter plate and just go with a CD009 or BMW transmission for the torque.

You can see here that the starter is on the driver’s side and not the passenger’s side like in the 86.

Just thinking this through a bit.

Our engines are actually symmetrical with the starter relief already available on both sides. I think this is because they want to start off with the same block half as other FA20/24 engines and CNC differently depending on model. This makes sense in the whole Subaru global platform thing.

Mounting our Bellhousing onto FA20DIT or FA24DIT would only require us omit one stud circled in red. Would this matter for strength/rigidity? probably not in the short/intermediate term.

That leaves machining the bell housing which can be done at a CNC/machine shop. There's enough room without upsetting the slave cylinder mounting, but will need some cad work but not too hard. Mount points for the starter already exists on the opposite side but you do need to shave down or "deck" themount points a bit to get the starter in the right depth. This can be done in the same subtraction process of the bell housing relief.

The brz starter might even be mounted on the other end, its still rotating in the same direction. Just need to look at clearances a bit.

2013-2022 MT Bellhousings are the same parts so you can even use 2022 beefy transmission instead of fitting CD009 if power levels aren't ridiculous. plenty of free bellhousings laying around. What other problems do you guys foresee? would like some community inputs

THIS IS NOT WORTH THE TROUBLE for an Accent motor or even 2022 WRX...This is only worthwhile for the STI FA24 motor which should be even stronger then the 86 FA24. Won't know or even get one for another 1.5 years.

[RedReplicant]

Someone got ahold of one, copying the translation / images here since Facebook

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.p...24654421103670

FA24D shortblock in for GT86/BRZ . We will look into whether this can serve as an upgrade to the FA20D for the older GT86/BRZ . I can already tell that it won't work on 2017 models without replacing the ecu with a fairly programmable one.... The trigger wheel for the crankshaft sensor doesn't fit.... But maybe we can modify this . To be continued!

[Tatsu333]

Originally Posted by RedReplicant

Someone got ahold of one, copying the translation / images here since Facebook

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.p...24654421103670

I wonder why they say it "won't work on 2017 models without replacing the ecu with a fairly programmable one" - as far as I'm aware, the early and late 1st gen ECU's are equally programmable with ECUTek...?

The trigger wheel for the crankshaft sensor could be an issue. I wonder how it "doesn't fit" - are they trying to fit the FA20D's trigger wheel to it? Is the tooth pattern different, or the diameter, or...? Is there a reason the FA24's trigger wheel can't be used? Could be that a custom one would need to be machined... EDIT: just looked up some pictures, and I guess the trigger wheel is a pretty convoluted stamped steel piece. Might be hard to replicate. Maybe it would be necessary to use the FA24's trigger wheel and sensor, and THAT makes it difficult to adapt to the 2017 ECU?

EDIT #2: Looking at this thread RE: swapping a 2017+ MT (red aluminum intake manifold) motor into a 2013-2016 car, maybe the issue between the FA24D and 2017+ FA20D is similar - the signal from the crank position sensor to the ECU is different enough that they're incompatible (E.G. one is reading high when the other reads low?). This post specifically says that a Subaru tech told him the 2017+ AT (plastic manifold) motors don't need to swap the trigger wheel and sensor, but the MT (aluminum manifold) motors do (which makes sense because the AT motors were a carryover). If that's the case, then it would seem it will be necessary to somehow make the 2017 trigger wheel and sensor work to use the 2017 ECU.

I'm also curious about the motor mounts, since they don't mention anything about them as an issue, though Subaru's info on the 2nd gen said something about the mounts being moved.

Interested to see where this goes! I've "Liked" their page on Facebook, so hopefully we'll see updates.

[TRS]

Anybody already knows about the weight difference of the shortblock only and/or complete engine with accessoires between FA20 and FA24?

[NoHaveMSG]

Originally Posted by Tatsu333

I wonder why they say it "won't work on 2017 models without replacing the ecu with a fairly programmable one" - as far as I'm aware, the early and late 1st gen ECU's are equally programmable with ECUTek...?

The trigger wheel for the crankshaft sensor could be an issue. I wonder how it "doesn't fit" - are they trying to fit the FA20D's trigger wheel to it? Is the tooth pattern different, or the diameter, or...? Is there a reason the FA24's trigger wheel can't be used? Could be that a custom one would need to be machined... EDIT: just looked up some pictures, and I guess the trigger wheel is a pretty convoluted stamped steel piece. Might be hard to replicate. Maybe it would be necessary to use the FA24's trigger wheel and sensor, and THAT makes it difficult to adapt to the 2017 ECU?

No way to know unless someone posts pictures of the parts.

I don't see why they couldn't modify the FA20 trigger wheel to work or have one made that will work. solidsnake11 used the FA20 trigger wheel and crank position sensor when he made his K swap run on the OEM twin ECU.

[Xero-Limit]

Interesting to see the work being done on a hybrid. With how difficult FA20 cores are to get this is very viable.

Trigger wheel for the crankshaft is not a big deal, machining one to fit is no big deal using a BRZ core.

The 2017/2013-2016 is around the cam tooth pattern. On the older cars they are one way and the 17+ and DIT models it is the opposite (male/female) so the ECU will have an inverse shape and thus not work. But if you're using cam phasers from whichever generation you're working with it should be a non-issue.

The bigger issue to me looks to be the piston design. Those valve cutouts don't look nearly big enough for the FA20 but hard to say 100% from the pictures alone.

As for the FA20 heads, we had them flow tested a good bit ago (http://www.moto-east.com/main/fa20-h...vs-ported-wrx/) and the FA20 flows more than you'll generally need for most setups. I don't see any issue with the bigger displacement motor.

Originally Posted by Tatsu333

I wonder why they say it "won't work on 2017 models without replacing the ecu with a fairly programmable one" - as far as I'm aware, the early and late 1st gen ECU's are equally programmable with ECUTek...?

The trigger wheel for the crankshaft sensor could be an issue. I wonder how it "doesn't fit" - are they trying to fit the FA20D's trigger wheel to it? Is the tooth pattern different, or the diameter, or...? Is there a reason the FA24's trigger wheel can't be used? Could be that a custom one would need to be machined... EDIT: just looked up some pictures, and I guess the trigger wheel is a pretty convoluted stamped steel piece. Might be hard to replicate. Maybe it would be necessary to use the FA24's trigger wheel and sensor, and THAT makes it difficult to adapt to the 2017 ECU?

EDIT #2: Looking at this thread RE: swapping a 2017+ MT (red aluminum intake manifold) motor into a 2013-2016 car, maybe the issue between the FA24D and 2017+ FA20D is similar - the signal from the crank position sensor to the ECU is different enough that they're incompatible (E.G. one is reading high when the other reads low?). This post specifically says that a Subaru tech told him the 2017+ AT (plastic manifold) motors don't need to swap the trigger wheel and sensor, but the MT (aluminum manifold) motors do (which makes sense because the AT motors were a carryover). If that's the case, then it would seem it will be necessary to somehow make the 2017 trigger wheel and sensor work to use the 2017 ECU.

I'm also curious about the motor mounts, since they don't mention anything about them as an issue, though Subaru's info on the 2nd gen said something about the mounts being moved.

Interested to see where this goes! I've "Liked" their page on Facebook, so hopefully we'll see updates.

[jflogerzi]

I am watching this thread. Rather go Hybrid FA20/24 block then a K swap when my current FA20 is done

[Jaden]

Originally Posted by jflogerzi

I am watching this thread. Rather go Hybrid FA20/24 block then a K swap when my current FA20 is done

I've got a long block from where I spun a rod bearing several years ago. I'd love for this to work out well and relatively easily as I could just use the heads from that long block on a fa24 short block...and sell my used engine that's currently in the car when I swap it out and probably end up somewhere in the neighborhood of dead even...

Jaden

Who wouldn't like to have a brand new short block with 30% more displacement for practically nothing other than a little elbow grease?

p.s. you're in Mo Valley? I used to be the IT director for Moss bros. It's where I got my FRS...

[RedReplicant]

Originally Posted by FrickingReallySlow

2013-2022 MT Bellhousings are the same parts so you can even use 2022 beefy transmission instead of fitting CD009 if power levels aren't ridiculous. plenty of free bellhousings laying around. What other problems do you guys foresee? would like some community inputs

Coming back to this, do we actually know if the 2022+ transmission has stronger 3rd and 4th gear sets? No real point unless this is the case given the cost difference between $2k for a new transmission and $150-500 for yet another used transmission.

I mulled it over a few weeks ago and ended up buying a Jack's Transmission. The real "solution" would be someone making a bell housing and rear trans mount that doesn't require welding (due to rulebook restrictions) to adapt a T5 or TKX to a FA.

[NoHaveMSG]

Originally Posted by Jaden

Who wouldn't like to have a brand new short block with 30% more displacement for practically nothing other than a little elbow grease?

It is going to be nowhere near that easy, even at it's easiest.

[FrickingReallySlow]

Originally Posted by RedReplicant

Coming back to this, do we actually know if the 2022+ transmission has stronger 3rd and 4th gear sets?

Check out the savage geese video they specifically mentioned this as well as other improvements in the gen2 trans when talking to their engineers. but yeah gen1 trans are now so cheap you can get 10 of those for the price of a new gen2