That engine though. Where will it sit among the great 4cyl NA's?

[drift86]

Originally Posted by Baldeagle

Curious question. Does anyone know how many degrees Subaru’s VVT phases the cam timing when it operates under the Atkinson cycle? Perhaps more relevant to this compression ratio discussion, does the ECU phase the cam timing to control knock? If yes, how much does it reduce the effective compression ratio?

If you are curious about that information, you can download the factory ECU tune files (you should be able to find the files online) and open them up in a software called Rom Raider. All the timing data is there for the 2.0. I expect the 2.4 software to work in a similar way, just with a different values in the tables.

Yes, it retards timing to control knock. A standard car actually knocks all the time, most often when driving at low rpm with high load. The ECU will reduce timing on the fly for individual knock events. And if it knocks consistently (eg. if you have bad fuel), there is something called the Ignition Advance Multiplier which is then reduced, which retards timing everywhere.

[Blighty]

Originally Posted by sneaky_pete

When I think of classic NA 4 cylinder engines I think of 4AGE, SR20DE, K/F Series, G13B (often overlooked gem).

Whilst the FA20, even with it flaws, makes impressive numbers from its 2.0 litres it will never be a classic engine. The FA24 will likely be the same.

As others have said the big question will be how tuneable the FA24 will be given the higher compression ratio. In my experience the FA20 responds well to a tune (because the stock tune is just sh#t), hi-flow flat panel air filter element, catless headers and overpipe which delivers smoother idle/running, better throttle response more power and torque where you need it. Clearly an engine that was strangled from the factory to meet emissions. The FA24 will likely be the same but with that higher compression ratio mucking around with tunes could be a dangerous exercise.

Its interesting isnt it.

I mean even if it proves itself I dont think people will think about this car as having a classic engine for years (unless the media push that idea - people are such sheep), but the numbers put it up there purely from a production cars power and torque perspective.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Blighty

Its interesting isnt it.

I mean even if it proves itself I dont think people will think about this car as having a classic engine for years (unless the media push that idea - people are such sheep), but the numbers put it up there purely from a production cars power and torque perspective.

It will probably be a nice engine that will probably be able to put close to 200HP to the ground on pump gas but I highly doubt a one off bastard child of a Toyota fuel system and Subaru internals and block is ever going to hit the engine museum of honour.

[Cephas]

^ This man could depress a hyena.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Cephas

^ This man could depress a hyena.

[Blighty]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

It will probably be a nice engine that will probably be able to put close to 200HP to the ground on pump gas but I highly doubt a one off bastard child of a Toyota fuel system and Subaru internals and block is ever going to hit the engine museum of honour.

Thats LOVE CHILD. Not bastard child.

I think your in the wrong forums.

[Blighty]

Great walk around. Looking better and better.

[NoHaveMSG]

Originally Posted by TommyW

How to make the FA20 amazing:
1) Blow it up
2) Replace with K Series

FIFY

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Blighty

Thats LOVE CHILD. Not bastard child.

I think your in the wrong forums.

Dude I think you misunderstand what I have been trying to get across. My statement in post 3 of this very thread sums it up.


I am a huge fan of boxer engines on a forum full of people that seem do despise boxer engines. I have been a huge fan of boxer engines since 1974 when I bought my first old and beat up Volkswagon. That love affair was reinforced a couple of times again over the years with a Karman Ghia and a 66 Corvair. I owned three boxer engine cars through a time when they probably made up about .00001% of the cars in North America.


The FA20 is a great little engine and a beautiful piece of engineering to use the D4S fuel system with port and direct injection to get a nominal 205 HP out of a 2 liter NA engine but it is indeed a bastard child since these are the ONLY cars that use it. Bastards can be the result of love too you know. It is already a great engine but because it isn't 300HP and has a 10% dip for a tenth of a second it is just hated on by so many. The dip isn't even a part of the engine it is purposely tuned there to meet emissions standards. You yourself have repeatedly shit all over that engine.


Now the 2.4 comes out you are singing it's praises and worshiping it on an alter and we don't have a clue what it is actually capable of yet. Yes the pretty graph looks nice on a computer screen but what will this engine actually do in real life? The few 10 minute review videos don't tell us a thing other than it looks good on 10 minute review videos. I am very happy they once again went with the Toyota fuel system since it brings the NA engine to life in a way that the Subaru single injection system can never do.
The high compression that they had to go with (more to meet emissions than to give performance I suspect) is a concern I have. If they have already pushed this engine to the limit then it is going to be a challenge to get much more out of it. One tank of bad gas could turn it into 400 pounds of scrap in an instant no matter how good the computer is at compensating for it.
Or these concerns may be way off the mark and they built enough leeway into the design that the compression will prove to be a none issue. The whole point is WE DON'T KNOW YET.


In a year we will start to see this engine in regular use and people will start to mod it. In about two years we will know just how successful an engine it is. At no point do I ever expect it to be held up as one of the greats since half the people that buy it will still hate it because it is indeed a boxer engine!

[Blighty]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Dude I think you misunderstand what I have been trying to get across. My statement in post 3 of this very thread sums it up.


I am a huge fan of boxer engines on a forum full of people that seem do despise boxer engines. I have been a huge fan of boxer engines since 1974 when I bought my first old and beat up Volkswagon. That love affair was reinforced a couple of times again over the years with a Karman Ghia and a 66 Corvair. I owned three boxer engine cars through a time when they probably made up about .00001% of the cars in North America.


The FA20 is a great little engine and a beautiful piece of engineering to use the D4S fuel system with port and direct injection to get a nominal 205 HP out of a 2 liter NA engine but it is indeed a bastard child since these are the ONLY cars that use it. Bastards can be the result of love too you know. It is already a great engine but because it isn't 300HP and has a 10% dip for a tenth of a second it is just hated on by so many. The dip isn't even a part of the engine it is purposely tuned there to meet emissions standards. You yourself have repeatedly shit all over that engine.


Now the 2.4 comes out you are singing it's praises and worshiping it on an alter and we don't have a clue what it is actually capable of yet. Yes the pretty graph looks nice on a computer screen but what will this engine actually do in real life? The few 10 minute review videos don't tell us a thing other than it looks good on 10 minute review videos. I am very happy they once again went with the Toyota fuel system since it brings the NA engine to life in a way that the Subaru single injection system can never do.
The high compression that they had to go with (more to meet emissions than to give performance I suspect) is a concern I have. If they have already pushed this engine to the limit then it is going to be a challenge to get much more out of it. One tank of bad gas could turn it into 400 pounds of scrap in an instant no matter how good the computer is at compensating for it.
Or these concerns may be way off the mark and they built enough leeway into the design that the compression will prove to be a none issue. The whole point is WE DON'T KNOW YET.


In a year we will start to see this engine in regular use and people will start to mod it. In about two years we will know just how successful an engine it is. At no point do I ever expect it to be held up as one of the greats since half the people that buy it will still hate it because it is indeed a boxer engine!

Hey hey hold on now, I loved my 86 to death, I would have it right now if I could 2012 GTS, way back when they still had a spare tire in the back. I loved it warts and all - I was FORCED to get rid of it this year, and miss it terribly.

I love that you love them, I'm just kidding around with you.

About the bagging the OG - nah comon - I made a joke about it when asked why it wasn't thought of as one of the great engines, and replied with a torque hole effect, but that's truth - its hard to be consider a wonderful engine because its got 120ft/lb of torque that needs hardware to fix. Its not that its not fantastic, its just got a clear weakness that needed sorting out(and honestly I didn't think it would be possible given restrictions).

I'm not sure why anyone would hate boxer engines - thats news to me, I thought that having one was special - makes me feel like I own something really exclusive. I mean and particularly for these cars its just sensational because they really have gone the extra mile to make the most out of being NA and a boxer with the the low cg - its all really special in my eyes.

There is NO DOUBT that I would be in your court right now had that not needed the money for a homeloan deposit, because I love the OG car.

Except I would of been worse and I would of been hoping they never even made another model!

But here I am, without a car but now have reserved one of the new ones for pre-order. So I'm not only happy again, but excited to see that they have really tried to keep everything the same and fix the torque hole potentially in the only way possible considering restrictions - making a big ass 2.4l torque machine.

[Dzmitry]

I actually decided to watch this video. Hilarious commentary, the guy just goes "Oooh, look at that!" about everything. But one thing he mentioned that caught my attention was that the head unit isn't the final product. Don't know how true this is, but it would be good if it isn't, as it hasn't been praised one bit.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Dzmitry

I actually decided to watch this video. Hilarious commentary, the guy just goes "Oooh, look at that!" about everything. But one thing he mentioned that caught my attention was that the head unit isn't the final product. Don't know how true this is, but it would be good if it isn't, as it hasn't been praised one bit.

Head units change from region to region and even model to model. There is no single head unit common to every body. Makes it confusing as hell!

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Blighty

its hard to be consider a wonderful engine because its got 120ft/lb of torque that needs hardware to fix.

Where did you come up with 120? The current gen has 156 not 120. The next gen is said to be 184 so that is only a 15% increase. Very nice to have but certainly not earth shattering by any means.

[NoHaveMSG]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Dude I think you misunderstand what I have been trying to get across. My statement in post 3 of this very thread sums it up.


I am a huge fan of boxer engines on a forum full of people that seem do despise boxer engines.

I hate boxers, but mostly due to the design being a pain in the ass to work on.