Will a tuned 2.0 ever approach stock 3.3 power?

[Andimal]

I haven't dug into the numbers but based on the tidbits I have seen, I would wager a guess that it would cost at the very least the price difference between a 2.0 to get up to 3.3 performance. In order to get to that point, you've now compromised long term reliability by pushing more boost, added an intercooler, louder exhaust, amongst other things.

The price difference between a base 3.3 and top 2.0 is under $200 MSRP.

 

[spacedawg]

Well I bought my base with the ADAS package new for about $8k less than any new base GT I could find, so I've got plenty of room to work with. Of course as I've stated, I'm not interested in trying to close that entire savings gap, just wanted to see the possibilities that are out there. Spending say around a quarter of that savings is reasonable to me, anything more than that and I agree, a GT is the way to go.

 

[Ek9max]

I think you'll spend much more and lose reliability in tuning your 2.0 up to the 3.3 levels.

I think somebody already suggested that you sell and buy a 3.3. I'm with that idea!

 

[Doel]

there's a tuned 2.0 on here running mid 13s, that's not slow by any means.

 

[Fboost]

Not sure about other countries but in Australia the 2l doesn't have Brembos so it's not just the power that the extra money gets you.
Can't believe no one else even mentioned this when advising wether to keep or mod???
If that's the case then it's not even a question, sell and buy a gt.
It would cost well over the price difference to match power and braking performance.
Personally you decided the 2l would do when you bought it, just be happy and enjoy it, don't waste your money on mods.
That's my 2 cents.

 

[Sunseeker]

I have a 2019 2.0 and have added a drop in K&N, Racechip RS, re-gapped OEM plugs, and XLR Throttle Controller. This combo thus far on 93 octane has been a huge leap over stock. With the car in Sport mode, Chip on mode 6 and XLR on race plus.....my fastest 0-60 run on and off launch control has been in the 5.5 secs range in between 50 and 60 degree temps. I'm planning on a adding a Catback exhaust this Summer and expect a bit more power, but do NOT see getting close to under 5 seconds flat. Halfway and maybe 3 quarters to a stock 3.3 is possible, but going beyond that as many have stated....the cost would put one in GT territory and possibly risk something going wrong in the 2.0. I am satisfied with my increased performance but need the feel, response and sound of an aftermarket exhaust to be fully content. I will look at a Dyno after the exhaust and new 0 to 60 runs.

 

[Nightshifter]

Thanks for the links @Angel, JB4 would definitely be tops on my list if I decide to go down the mod path.



@Yemen you're the first one I've seen to quote 5s 0-60, so that's heartening to hear. I'm dubious on the merits of an intake vs drop-in filter, many say it doesn't matter, many say intake is the way to go. Considering I'm not looking to eek every single hp out of it, I'll probably stick w/ the drop-ins for now. That being said, like I told Angel above, I think JB4 is going to be the first purchase after I've made up my mind on modding or not. May do an exhuast after that if I can find one that doesn't sound like a fart in a can and doesn't drone.

That's what I don't understand... how Car & Driver got 6.0 0 - 60 on this car... Did you use launch control when it was stock?

 

[Sunseeker]

Just got the custom catback exhaust (Street Demon) installed this past weekend. I was told to expect 6 to 8 hp gain at the wheels on the low side. Too much low speed drone at the moment. Not sure if it takes time for everything to gel (K&N Filter, Racechip and XLR Throttle Controller) with the performance exhaust. Seems as if I lost some pull at low rpm, but when it kicks in, it goes like crazy and feels as if it pulls a little harder once it gets going. Maybe the drop in K&N is the bottleneck vs a short ram or cold air intake. I will be done performance wise after that. For now, I will give it about 30 days for everything to gel and then get it on a Dyno. I'm hoping for between 240 - 250 at the wheels. This will do me fine, but would only be about halfway to the 3.3.

 

[eflyguy]

AMG has a 2.0 that produces more power (but less torque) than the Lambda II T.

It's not lugging around ~4,000lbs, however.

 

[Sunseeker]

The 2.0 Stinger makes 200 whp with 1 turbo. You would think that the twin turbo would make 400 whp with 2 turbos. But instead,, it makes around 300 whp. Is the single turbo in the 2.0 bigger than each of the twin turbos? The 2.0 turbo is a twin scroll......are the 3.3 turbos twin scroll as well?

 

[RUFFSTUFF]

The 2.0 Stinger makes 200 whp with 1 turbo. You would think that the twin turbo would make 400 whp with 2 turbos. But instead,, it makes around 300 whp. Is the single turbo in the 2.0 bigger than each of the twin turbos? The 2.0 turbo is a twin scroll......are the 3.3 turbos twin scroll as well?

Your knowledge of engine design and mathematics is not. lol

 

[eflyguy]

There's this minor detail called "capacity"..

 

[Aarvix]

 

[Sunseeker]

Thanks....lol. I am aware that 2 + 2 does not equal 4 when it comes to hp numbers and performance output. But does anyone know if the 2.0 turbo is the same size as the turbos in the 3.3? Are the 3.3 turbos twin scroll? Reason I ask is that I owned a BMW 330i that was called Twin Powered (One turbo, Twin Scroll) because they went from a Twin Turbo setup to a single Twin Scroll Turbo and maintained same crank hp. Just wanted to know comparisons between 2.0 and 3.3 (each single turbo).

 

[343BlueR32]

View attachment 23894

Wow I have never seen a 2.0 engine bay.

 

[monusa]

Ok.....a little late to this party but have to chime in....i have a 2.0 RWD (little over 200lbs. lighter than GT). the GT will require "more" to gain a percentage increase in performance than the 2.0T. meaning if you add jb4 on map 1 compared to GT on map 1, the 2.0 will have a larger performance increase than the GT(considering price difference, etc). Just math.....that being said, the GT starts the race with a 100 hp jump start but is on average, $8K more than the 2.0T. i have a jb4 on map2 in my 2.0T and although it may not best the GT outright, if the GT is stock, it is going to have to work "real" hard to leave the 2.0T up until the "speed nannies" kick in on the 2.0. i test drove a GTS and compared to the 2.0 on map2 ( at an $8K savings), you won't be let down with 2.0T and jb4.

 

[RUFFSTUFF]

Ok.....a little late to this party but have to chime in....

Next time try harder to resist the urge... lol

lol
lol
lol

 

[eflyguy]

Next time try harder to resist the urge... lol

It's ok, sometimes it's nice to be reminded they walk amongst us..

 

[Nuthadey]

if the GT is stock, it is going to have to work "real" hard to leave the 2.0T up until the "speed nannies" kick in on

Umm, I'm pretty sure in your given scenario it will be the jb4'd 2.0t that will have to "work real hard" not to get walked. The stock 3.3tt will just do what it's supposed to.

Guess what, your car is faster than a Kia Rio. A Kia Rio is $18k cheaper than your car. Who wins the race? How much money you saved doesn't factor in when racing. A slower car is slower no matter if it cost 5 or 5 million less than the cars it loses to.

 

[87and66]

are the 3.3 turbos twin scroll as well?

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but It's not possible to have twin scroll turbos on a v6 because you have an odd number (3) of cylinders on each side. Because of the way they need to be fed (equally to each "scroll"), they are only used on I4, I6, and V8 engines