Dyno Numbers

[Pete]

https://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=88696

Check out the dyno graph of these ACE headers on a gen 1 car. The most torque in the whole range is right where the dip used to be. If we can get a high quality set of pipes like these for the new engine it will be a big torque hill in the middle. Exciting to speculate about!

Red line is otherwise stock car with ACE headers and overpipe on California 91 octane.

[Grif]

The 2nd gen graph suggests the power is flat for approximately 500rpm - from 3800rpm to 4300rpm.
Compare this to the kouki 1st gen which had a relatively flat power range of 1000rpm - from 3300rpm to 4300rpm.
https://performancedrive.com.au/wp-c...no-results.jpg

[Stonehorsw]

Concerns me more the 6250rpm on loss of torque. Seems like it looses breath there.

[Ohio Enthusiast]

Originally Posted by Stonehorsw

Concerns me more the 6250rpm on loss of torque. Seems like it looses breath there.

My fears exactly. I really hope they didn't sacrifice the high end pull to placate the journalists with a lower peak torque RPM...

[ichitaka05]

Just remember Monster Sport made FA24 kit making almost same kinda spec of TQ/HP. Wonder if same TQ curve as this stock FA24

For a reference, here’s a vid

[Ohio Enthusiast]

But this one is bored and stroked, vs. just bored in the gen 2 FA24. Plus I doubt the Monster Sport build needs to meet the same emissions and fuel economy standards as Subaru did.

[ichitaka05]

Originally Posted by Ohio Enthusiast

But this one is bored and stroked, vs. just bored in the gen 2 FA24. Plus I doubt the Monster Sport build needs to meet the same emissions and fuel economy standards as Subaru did.

I'm not stating gen2 FA sucks, just I prayed they learn their lesson from EZ engine... but that's different topic in general.

Putting my opinion on the side, there's another 2.4 Liter FA engine we can compare em to see what's the difference. We can see it has same kind of power output. If tq dip is gone, we can guess other mods that made the difference (example: Header). , Other than the dip, we can "assume" it has same kind of power curve. If not, it'll be interesting discussion what causes the curve difference. From there, we can somewhat expect from aftermarket mods on FA24.

[SockMonkey]

Originally Posted by Pete

https://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=88696

Check out the dyno graph of these ACE headers on a gen 1 car. The most torque in the whole range is right where the dip used to be. If we can get a high quality set of pipes like these for the new engine it will be a big torque hill in the middle. Exciting to speculate about!

Red line is otherwise stock car with ACE headers and overpipe on California 91 octane.

Check out this one too. Blue is stock, red is intake and header (intakes don't really gain hp), and green is with a tune. Just the header gets significant gains and almost eliminates the dip. I think we can expect similar results on the gen2.

[slimfit]

^^Dumb question, but do both catted and catless headers produce the same results? Or is it only catless?

[Baldeagle]

What does a higher quality header (with cat), plus labor plus a quality tune cost?

[Dzmitry]

I actually made my own comparison early on before this thread really blasted off. Since everyone is throwing around dyno graphs now, I guess I'll throw it on to show people the difference.

The only thing to keep in mind here is that they are NOT scaled properly, so don't compare them in terms of how much more power or torque one has over the other. The way I scaled them was shifted all the torque values based on their peaks (184 for gen2 and 156 for gen1).

This is the 2013 vs 2022 and both values were pretty accurately chosen from the same type of dyno (Dynapack).

The red lines I drew are just kind of random for showing where the average torque mostly lies.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Dzmitry

The only thing to keep in mind here is that they are NOT scaled properly, so don't compare them in terms of how much more power or torque one has than the other. The way I scaled them was shifted all the torque values based on their peaks (184 for gen2 and 156 for gen1).

OK, that makes sense then lol. At first I thought that you had a 1st gen that dyno'd at 163tq/196hp and was like "no way" but then you were like "way".

[Dzmitry]

Originally Posted by Pete

OK, that makes sense then lol. At first I thought that you had a 1st gen that dyno'd at 163tq/196hp and was like "no way" but then you were like "way".

Actually... you make a good point... I scaled the gen1 wrong. It should be scaled to a peak of 156tq, lemme fix that and repost.

EDIT: Now that I think about it, I remembered I used the gen1 peak torque RPM as the reference, so It's at 156 up in the high revs.
Either way, as I stated, the scales are not correct, so don't use them as a reference. I really made it for the shape of the curve to see the differences.

[Jianlun]

Originally Posted by ichitaka05

Just remember Monster Sport made FA24 kit making almost same kinda spec of TQ/HP. Wonder if same TQ curve as this stock FA24

For a reference, here’s a vid

Wonder what kind of rod stroke ratio the MonsterSport FA24 has, with its long 93mm stroke.

I assume the new toyobaru FA24 has the same rod stroke (a miserable 1.5 ratio) as the fa20 since its merely "bored out". With Japan videos saying its same weight as the FA20 etc, I assume the block height is the same (else it will not fit within the wheels!). Would have been interesting if they reduced the compression height (and thus longer rod) by moving the wrist pin up but the side by side photos of the FA20 and FA24 piston/rod weeks ago seem to show the compression height is similiar if not same.

And now I am going to dream about a MonsterSport FA26 with a 94mm x 93mm bore stroke. Hahahah.