| Author | Topic |
|---|
Location:
Sydney, OZ
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
Wed, 16 October 2002 09:02
 
|
 |
| Quote: |
why use an engine which is only slightly better than the original? Why not go for something decent?
|
Mate it's not slightly better, it's heaps, otherwise the RA65 would of had an 18RC. I replaced the 18RC in an RA40 with the 22R in this thread, big difference!!
| Quote: |
Let's face it, a Celica with a 22R is never going to be fast (not without lots of money thrown at it anyway).
|
Neither is an 18RC version! Ever seen a standard '93 22RC Hilux(1250KG) race a '80 18RC (1050kg) celica which had been recently rebuilt with some mild mod's? guess who won? guess who bought the 22R after I some spastic rode my the hilux off? 18RC vs 22RC no comparison. Cubes always win. Besides, with a cam change, the engine has more like 100kw and resides in a part's pick Corona wagon he uses, a lot of work for is need to an 18RC to reach this mark vs the 22R which use mostly stock parts after it's 2nd rebuild!!
| Quote: |
In any case I wouldn't recommend using a 22R-TE manifold if you want a turbo - it's a very poorly designed manifold. Also, it locates the turbo in a position which will foul the steering box on a LHD car
|
Last time I read The 22RTE was sold in the US ie LHD, but I will agree, a custom always does give better results.
Norbie,
let's remember, MTS is talking about pumping his cash into and 18RC not an 18RG, THE BEST CHOICE OF ALL THE R ENGINES. The last time an 18RC saw a dyno it show less power than a late model 22R from a Hilux, I really can't say I have seen any '90+ model 18RC either... So why use something At least 20 years old?
MTS if EFI doesn't fit, though I'm really not sure, a set of good webbers, 20R head, ported etc, and anything else your thinking about, the 18RC won't come close to the 22R
|
|
|
| | Subject | Poster | Date |
|---|
 |
Usable RPM range
|
mtsbirch | Sun, 13 October 2002 15:59 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
GIN51E | Sun, 13 October 2002 21:33 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
Johnny | Mon, 14 October 2002 07:04 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
Norbie | Mon, 14 October 2002 07:24 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
Johnny | Mon, 14 October 2002 08:59 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
mtsbirch | Mon, 14 October 2002 15:18 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
Johnny | Tue, 15 October 2002 08:23 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
mtsbirch | Tue, 15 October 2002 23:10 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
Johnny | Wed, 16 October 2002 01:33 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
Norbie | Wed, 16 October 2002 02:31 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
mtsbirch | Wed, 16 October 2002 03:53 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
Johnny | Wed, 16 October 2002 09:02 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
Norbie | Thu, 17 October 2002 06:31 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
Johnny | Thu, 17 October 2002 13:34 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
mtsbirch | Thu, 17 October 2002 14:12 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
Norbie | Thu, 17 October 2002 14:28 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
Johnny | Fri, 18 October 2002 13:14 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
celicamad85 | Wed, 16 October 2002 10:00 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
mtsbirch | Thu, 17 October 2002 05:54 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
chubbylover53 | Mon, 29 March 2004 04:00 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
draven | Wed, 16 October 2002 10:10 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
Norbie | Fri, 18 October 2002 13:45 |
|
Re: Usable RPM range
|
Johnny | Sun, 20 October 2002 23:07 |
| Current Time:
Wed Jul 23 22:00:57 UTC 2025 |
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.0043587684631348 seconds |
