4g63 to 4g64 swap

[interex]

Thanks for adding the pics to the thread, shows what needs to be done to block the oil drain holes.

I myself used freeze plugs that were given to me from a guy at NAPA. We sifted through a big mess of them to find the right sizes.

 

[ibspoolin2]

hey guys sorry to barge in on a thread but im trying to do research before i build my motor and im looking for the best setup. Im going to build a N/A motor for my 1G. Im looking in to doin this 4g64 bottom end with the 4g63 head. I read in the N/A section that if i do this it would make a 11:1 compreasion with stock internals. is this right? and i still dont understand about how i do the timing belt on the setup. and if this is true what year bottom end block do i need?

 

[MidShipCivic]

hey guys sorry to barge in on a thread but im trying to do research before i build my motor and im looking for the best setup. Im going to build a N/A motor for my 1G. Im looking in to doin this 4g64 bottom end with the 4g63 head. I read in the N/A section that if i do this it would make a 11:1 compreasion with stock internals. is this right? and i still dont understand about how i do the timing belt on the setup. and if this is true what year bottom end block do i need?

8 valve head cc in mathematical calculation cause a very high compression ratio. 16v heads are the same cc's as 4g63 DOHC heads.

 

[fuzzydoodle]

So has anyone actually completed this build on here, or just speculated what would work best for them?

I finally pulled my 7 bolt 2.4 out of the box it came shipped in, tried to bolt it up to the engine stand, (right after having a 7 bolt 2.0 on there) and the bellhousing bolts were different, I had to move the arms for the engine stand.

Does anyone have any info on that??
Pictures or anything? How does that work? Are the tranny's not the same?
I mean obviously not due to AWD and the FWD that the 2.4 came with, but the bellhousing should be the same.......??

 

[infinite_kaos]

I saw this thread and have found it completely interesting. I just blew my recently rebuilt 4g63t (melted the #2 piston and scored the cylinder wall)

Anyway, I would much rather build a 2.4 considering the cheaper price, and torque. Has anybody made a list of parts that are required for this build?

From what I've read, it seems the following are needed:
4g64 block (or g4cs for 6 bolt?)
Stroker pistons (to lower the compression ratio?)
Cam gears from dohc 2.4 or adjustbale 4g63 cam gears for degreeing
And that's it?

If I'm missing something let me know please, I'd like to get started on this asap.

 

[MidShipCivic]

So has anyone actually completed this build on here, or just speculated what would work best for them?

What do you mean? The benefit is increased displacement and stroke do everything as you would to a 4g63.

I finally pulled my 7 bolt 2.4 out of the box it came shipped in, tried to bolt it up to the engine stand, (right after having a 7 bolt 2.0 on there) and the bellhousing bolts were different, I had to move the arms for the engine stand.

The bolt thread, diameter and pattern are the same.

Does anyone have any info on that??
Pictures or anything? How does that work? Are the tranny's not the same?
I mean obviously not due to AWD and the FWD that the 2.4 came with, but the bellhousing should be the same.......??

They are the same bolt pattern.

Anyway, I would much rather build a 2.4 considering the cheaper price, and torque. Has anybody made a list of parts that are required for this build?


From what I've read, it seems the following are needed:
4g64 block (or g4cs for 6 bolt?) ( if you want to use your front mount stick with the gc4s)


Stroker pistons (to lower the compression ratio?)

( you do NOT use stroker pistons in a 4g64 ) you use 4g64 pistons and 4g63 rods

Cam gears from dohc 2.4 or adjustbale 4g63 cam gears for degreeing
And that's it?

You can use stock 4g63 half a tooth off(see below), adjustable gears or stock 4g64 camgears.

If I'm missing something let me know please, I'd like to get started on this asap.

You're missing a lot of reading and research.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

 

[fuzzydoodle]

Then I must have the only 4g64 block that has a different bellhousing pattern, and if you read my post, I don't ask WHY you would do a 2.4 build, I ask if anyone has COMPLETED a 2.4L DOHC TURBO ENGINE BUILD......

I appreciate the fast response, would just appreciate valid information more.

I would assume if I had to change the pattern of the engine stand, that the bolt pattern was different, not to mention I am not retarded and it looks different.

I would also assume that if I was reading someone elses' post..

But again thanks.......?

 

[infinite_kaos]

The reason I said stroker pistons is because I read in this thread that people are using storker pistons.

So I missed a lot of reading? Maybe I should search more on the subject, I thought this thread would be helpful though. Thanks.

 

[delta448]

So has anyone actually completed this build on here, or just speculated what would work best for them?

I finally pulled my 7 bolt 2.4 out of the box it came shipped in, tried to bolt it up to the engine stand, (right after having a 7 bolt 2.0 on there) and the bellhousing bolts were different, I had to move the arms for the engine stand.

Does anyone have any info on that??
Pictures or anything? How does that work? Are the tranny's not the same?
I mean obviously not due to AWD and the FWD that the 2.4 came with, but the bellhousing should be the same.......??

Here's what I know about the bellhousings.

As far as I know, the only differences between the generations has been the bellhousing width, motor mounts and the head orientation. I may be mistaken but I distinctly remember discussing this issue in depth (the viability of using the newer blocks), via PM, with another member doing this swap. We both came to the conclusion that as long as you have a block with the 12.5 inch bellhousing bolt pattern you are okay. The larger "wideblock" 13.25 inch bellhousing width seems to have only ever been used in RWD applications, such as the Mighty Max pickup, so as long as you pull the engine from a FWD application you should be fine.

 

[MidShipCivic]

Then I must have the only 4g64 block that has a different bellhousing pattern, and if you read my post, I don't ask WHY you would do a 2.4 build, I ask if anyone has COMPLETED a 2.4L DOHC TURBO ENGINE BUILD......

I appreciate the fast response, would just appreciate valid information more.

I would assume if I had to change the pattern of the engine stand, that the bolt pattern was different, not to mention I am not retarded and it looks different.

I would also assume that if I was reading someone elses' post..

But again thanks.......?

First off, you're lost and don't start assuming I don't know. I have a 7 bolt I've assembled one , yet you just received your motor..

Unless you bought an engine where the engine is on the drivers side which has the transmission on the drivers side that's the only way one wouldn't fit or an early mighty max from the early to mid 80's which has a different bell bolt pattern.

And if you pulled an engine off a stand the fingers don't perfectly stay in their positions take an awd starter plate and place it on the back of the motor.

 

[fuzzydoodle]

Thanks Delta for the only useful information.

Now for the people that like to babble and run their mouth, but don't contribute in any way.

For one dood, I am not lost, that's your first mistake, and two I didn't "just" get the motor, never once did I say, "I just got my motor", again, you might (like I said before) try reading the post before you go bestowing your "wisdom?" on people.
I thought we covered this with my last post but apparently you don't read English well.

Does anyone have any info on that??
Pictures or anything?

This doesn't mean I was looking for an answer like "They are the same bolt pattern"

Because, now bear with me, again, this means, I know their not, or don't appear to be, due to the fact I have already looked at them, and had the started plate right near it.

And if you pulled an engine off a stand the fingers don't perfectly stay in their positions take an awd starter plate and place it on the back of the motor.

Now this is my personal favorite, you forget you already told me not to "assume" yet here you go, just like your self disillusioned idea that you know everything, and "assume" that every engine stand is just like the one you use. Actually smart guy, the engine stand I have you can tighten the arms to stay in their position.

And where do you get if he wants to use his front mount he needs to get a g4cs???? This is just more of your useless, not correct posts (and by not correct there is multiple people using a 7 bolt 64 block with a front mount, the block has nothing to do with your intercooler).

I am going to hope that if you do decide to re-post, you think about your post before posting, and quite honestly from your crap advice, I really hope you don't post, because for the most it has been useless.

Now for anyone who likes to contribute valid advice, its a 4g64 block, but the bellhousing looks like its one bolt hole short on the right side (if your looking from the end where the trans bolts).
Its the one on the very right, bottom, it just doesn't exist, the block is rounded there (as opposed to the 2.0).

And I cant find any real good pics on the net of the transmission, and I don't remember when I pulled mine, if there was an extra hole on the trans I could use, maybe one that is not being used on the 2.0.
The pattern is the same, same width and everything just that one bolt hole on the right is not there.

But from what it sounds like, maybe I got one in a million...?

So I correct myself, its not missing, its just moved up about an inch and a half. Take a look.

 

[caged]

Project Zero G Forums ~ Index This site has lots of 4g64 info. There are two blocks, narrow block and a wide block. The narrow blocks came out in fwd and awd cars, the wide block came out in rwd vehicles ,the mighty max and L300 vans (dont think your country got these) and these blocks in 2003+ l300s. The wide blocks are 1 and a bit inches wider on the lower bellhousing bolts.

 

[MidShipCivic]

Thanks Delta for the only useful information.

Now for the people that like to babble and run their mouth, but don't contribute in any way.

For one dood, I am not lost, that's your first mistake, and two I didn't "just" get the motor, never once did I say, "I just got my motor", again, you might (like I said before) try reading the post before you go bestowing your "wisdom?" on people.
I thought we covered this with my last post but apparently you don't read English well.

Funny you pulled it out of a box as far as I know you just got it.

This doesn't mean I was lookig for an answer like "They are the same bolt pattern"

Because, now bear with me, again, this means, I know their not, or don't appear to be, due to the fact I have already looked at them, and had the started plate right near it.


Now this is my personal favorite, you forget you already told me not to "assume" yet here you go, just like your self disillusioned idea that you know everything, and "assume" that every engine stand is just like the one you use. Actually smart guy, the engine stand I have you can tighten the arms to stay in their position.

Let's mock your uninformed behind. ''HAS ANYONE COMPLETED'' In this dimension earth, reality and dsmtuners that's called assuming.

Next.

I build tons of engines and move them around more than you they are defying gravity by holding an enormous offset of weight if you think they don't shift around you must have bought that stand in your dimension where they aren't following physics.

And where do you get if he wants to use his front mount he needs to get a g4cs???? This is just more of your useless, not correct posts (and by not correct there is multiple people using a 7 bolt 64 block with a front mount, the block has nothing to do with your intercooler).



I am going to hope that if you do decide to re-post, you think about your post before posting, and quite honestly from your crap advice, I really hope you don't post, because for the most it has been useless.

Oh yeah you're real sharp as sharp as butter knives.

FRONT MOUNT if the subject 4g64 swapping. I must be talking about ENGINE MOUNT he owns a ''92 TALON TSI'' if he uses a 7 bolt 4g64 from a lets say 93 Galant he will not have a spot on the block for a front engine mount. It was far from trivial.

Seriously you should keep your mouth shut take my words in like a dry sponge takes in water.

You're VERY lost you come in here asking questions and stress '' informational and valid points'', but yet no one knows what vehicle you taken your motor from.

Now for anyone who likes to contribute valid advice, its a 4g64 block, but the bellhousing looks like its one bolt hole short on the right side (if your looking from the end where the trans bolts).
Its the one on the very right, bottom, it just doesn't exist, the block is rounded there (as opposed to the 2.0).

Now if you paid attention to some 2.4 pictures by searching you can find on the net with in 2 minutes since you wanted to do this swap after all you'd think you'll will go find some pictures and see that fwd based 4g64's do not have a casting on the front of the block like yours.

7-bolt 4G64 buildup and swap with 1G head

 

[fuzzydoodle]

Right, but you assume I just got it? ANYWAYS..

How is "HAS ANY ONE COMPLETED" assuming? Actually bonehead, in reality, that's called asking a question. Because from the thread, people are just speculating or telling what will work best and what they have, none that I had read said "I have COMPLETED this build and here is the deal". WOW.

Oh dear me, what have I done, I have mocked my messiah...you have no idea what I do for a living or in my free time, I could build engines for a living, this is just more of your assumptions.
Now the fact that your probably right is irrelevant, but even so, you could build as many engines as you want that doesn't change that fact that you can tighten the arms on my stand down to stay in their exact spot. "PHYSICS" or not.

I do admit, since I don't own one I forget that that mounts are a little different on 1g's, so for that foot in mouth.
But seriously, LMFAO "take my words in like a dry sponge takes in water", your a messiah, self
proclaimed "master mechanic", and a comedian. WOW.
And "Lost" doesn't have anything to do with getting information from people who have done this before, I don't know if you noticed wise guy, but that's what this site is for, so then everyone is "LOST", seriously, your a riot.

And actually, I have searched for pictures to see what the difference is, now maybe I typed them in wrong, but nothing came up, now anyone that has done a search knows sometimes its just choice of words to get the results your looking for.

But your all knowing, so you probably have no problems with that.

And just like I said, thanks Delta for the only "useful" information, now I know there is some variations on the bolt pattern, from what I understand one is "wider" which mine is not....this is where if someone was going to be helpful they would assist in figuring out what the deal was, not insist they are on top of the world and know everything.

Now if my starter plate is exactly the same, less that one bolt hole lining up, its probably not the wider Mighty Max block, maybe a different block, but not wider.

And now this is coming from someone who says "search" but assumes no one does, someone doing any searching, about 4g64 swaps would easily find that write up,

I know the "vfaq" on it

Yet even in that, there is no definitive pictures of the bolt pattern, except while its on the hoist with the trans attached, and its not 100% visible. But your the smart guy and you instantly knew.

Maybe if your going to try and be "helpful" ask questions and then answer, instead of assuming and making yourself look bad.
Now again, I hope if your going to re-post you think about it first, ask questions if your unsure.

 

[infinite_kaos]

Wow you guys are hilarious. As much as I enjoy the chick fight, I highly suggest taking it to pm's or you guys an exchange numbers and argue over cofee. If you're bickering continues its gonna get this thread closed, then everyone "loses"

Back on topic, I did manage to do more research as suggested and found all the info that I was missing.

Now, I was talking with a fellow DSMer today and mentioned the 2.4 build, he said that he wouldn't go that route due to personal choice, and that with the stroked motor the piston speed is gonna be much higher then the piston speed on 2.0. So if you were to rev your engine to 7k rpm, the piston speed would be somewhere up in the 9krpm range.

Is this true, also that the powerband would be smaller, since most of your power wouldn't come until 4k rpm, then if you're redline is 7k rpm you powerband is only 3k rpms which isn't worth it, and you would only benefit from a small turbo.

Any word on this, I've seen guys running some really good numbers on their 2.4's. Maybe he's thinking something different?

 

[g_ferg]

So has anyone actually completed this build on here, or just speculated what would work best for them?

I finally pulled my 7 bolt 2.4 out of the box it came shipped in, tried to bolt it up to the engine stand, (right after having a 7 bolt 2.0 on there) and the bellhousing bolts were different, I had to move the arms for the engine stand.

Does anyone have any info on that??
Pictures or anything? How does that work? Are the tranny's not the same?
I mean obviously not due to AWD and the FWD that the 2.4 came with, but the bellhousing should be the same.......??

I've had a 2.4 in my car for about a year now. And yes many ppl have compleated this build .

 

[fuzzydoodle]

I know that people have done it, and yes that's exactly the point I am trying to get across, this is suppose to be an informational thread, which means you ask questions and get answers, or none at all.
Point exactly! Thank you.

But from what I understand its the 2.3 that have those extreme angles, since it is a longer stroke in a shorter block, the 2.4 should be fine because its made to have this certain stroke, you just lower the compression with pistons, either dished or whatnot. As well as the higher displacement will give you bigger numbers in less rotations, much like a big block, only revving to 4-5 grand. Also the higher displacement will take in more air every rotation therefor helping to spool a larger turbo slightly faster than a 2.0, so you would have your powerband come on faster, theoretically at least. And unless your tracking your car, the stock 7k rev should be plenty, at least for me, I don't rev my car past 6 anyway, so for me at least this is not a concern as I have no intention or tracking my car.

G ferg, was your bellhousing the exact same as the 2.0? It should be right? Have you ever heard of which one could be like the one in those pics? From everything I have heard the only one that is different is the Mighty Max one, but it wider. It is stamped 4g64, supposedly from a spyder, but I am curious to the legitimacy of that now.

I cant remember how many bolts the trans on, but I was wondering if I just bolted that to it minus that one bolt. Point being I have never done this, so like I said, I was looking for people WHO HAVE, so I can decide if the block is wrong or what, maybe I just need to track down a bare block I don't know.

 

[g_ferg]

I know that people have done it, and yes that's exactly the point I am trying to get across, this is suppose to be an informational thread, which means you ask questions and get answers, or none at all.
Point exactly! Thank you.

If you really want a lot of information regarding this build I suggest reading this to start with. It has a lot of answers to the questions you have asked. And probably still have. It helped me out a ton when i first did this. http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/stroker-tech/100677-looking-4g64-g4cs-answers-look-here.html

But from what I understand its the 2.3 that have those extreme angles, since it is a longer stroke in a shorter block, the 2.4 should be fine because its made to have this certain stroke, you just lower the compression with pistons, either dished or whatnot. As well as the higher displacement will give you bigger numbers in less rotations, much like a big block, only revving to 4-5 grand. Also the higher displacement will take in more air every rotation therefor helping to spool a larger turbo slightly faster than a 2.0, so you would have your powerband come on faster, theoretically at least. And unless your tracking your car, the stock 7k rev should be plenty, at least for me, I don't rev my car past 6 anyway, so for me at least this is not a concern as I have no intention or tracking my car.

The 2.4 is perfectly fine revving to 7k. There are also different rods and pistons you can get to achieve 10k plus on them.

G ferg, was your bellhousing the exact same as the 2.0? It should be right? Have you ever heard of which one could be like the one in those pics? From everything I have heard the only one that is different is the Mighty Max one, but it wider. It is stamped 4g64, supposedly from a spyder, but I am curious to the legitimacy of that now.

There was one bolt if i remembe rirght that didnt line up right. But I cant remember for sure. I would go look on the car but its 14 miles away from me and i wont see it till this weekend. I can let you know then if you still need.

I cant remember how many bolts the trans on, but I was wondering if I just bolted that to it minus that one bolt. Point being I have never done this, so like I said, I was looking for people WHO HAVE, so I can decide if the block is wrong or what, maybe I just need to track down a bare block I don't know.

I'm pretty sure it is only 4 bolts for the actual tranny. Then you have the ones that bolt to the starter to it. But I have read of others not being able to bolt all the bolts minus the one. And ran it fine like that.

 

[fuzzydoodle]

Yeah, that's exactly what I was thinking on the revving, I didn't feel I needed any more either, but you hear that all the time "oh your not going to be able to rev it very high".
But that just didn't concern me, I am perfectly fine with my 7k limit now, besides, if I really want to after I get the 2.0 out I will just build that to rev to the moon. I was only saying that because infinite asked.

Thanks for all the helpful info! I have looked through that thread a little, but every time I ever get on I always forget to look, I am a master procrastinator, .

Yes! See that's what I like to hear, that at least tells me I might not be the only one, definitely if you get a chance to check that out let me know, I would really appreciate that.

I thought there was only four bolts too, I just could not remember for sure, which, if was the case looks like it would bolt on fine.

 

[98spydert]

Dang, I've been scanning through the pages in this thread and you guys are making this way harder than it seems. I've got about 2,000 miles on my new 64/63 build and everything is going just fine. When I'm wrenching under the hood, I forget it's a 4G64 most of the time. There's not a lot of custom work to it at all.

I have an early 95 GSX Auto with a '98 Galant 2.4L 4G64 block and 95/96 4G63 DOHC turbo head. I'll try to answer any questions about the build but it's not really that difficult. It is expensive and time consuming to build an engine with aftermarket internals, machine work, head work and so on. But there were only a hand full of differences between using the 4G64 block as opposed to the 4G63 block.

I know 1Gs and the 6 bolt 2.4s are different but here's a run down off the top of my head of the process concerning tthe 4G64 from the 7G Galant into a turbo 2G:

I got a 4G64 complete short block out of a '98 FWD Galant from a salvage yard for $150. Stripped it down bare and had the machine shop do the complete work up that a 4G63 would take, nothing different. Cleaned, tanked, surfaced the deck, painted it, over bored slightly and assembled it with:
The 4G64 crank and girdle
Wiseco #K548M87 .020 over pistons for the 64/63 combo w/ 22mm pin
Eagle rods for a 7-bolt 92-99 4G63
ARP Main studs for a 90-99 4G63
Clevite main and rod bearings for a 95-99 4G63
And I don't know if they're worth while or not, or if you can even get them anymore but a Main Bearing Cap Alignment Dowel (MBCAD) Kit from Buscher
And I left the balance shafts out

All of the gaskets and misc stuff came from a Mitsu OEM block/head overhaul gasket kit for a 95-99 4G63 that ran $219.

The only additional work you'd need is the 5 extra holes on the deck plugged with freeze plugs. RRE used to suggest laying pieces of aluminum over them and using RTV as a seal. This DOES NOT WORK. They are drain holes and do not have pressurized oil going to them, but oil does make it up those holes do to the turbulence inside the engine combined with a little blow buy through the rings. Oil will spray out of those holes. Freeze plug them and be done with it. If you don't, you'll be pulling your head to do it later like I am right now. The idiots that put my engine together botched that part but lucky for me it's an easy fix and everything else went smoothly.

The head is a '96 4G63 head that was tanked, 3 angle valve job, P&Ped and gasket matched, surfaced, and assembled with Brian Crower valve train components, Fp2s, Fidenza cam gears, and bolted on with ARP studs for a 95-99 4G63.

When combining the head and block you'll need an appropriate head gasket. I just got a 4G63 Cometic with a 87mm bore. And you'll need a 4G64 factory timing belt. The factory 4G63 cam gears sit funny but work. The timing marks line up wrong so can either compensate for this and use them anyways or switch to adjustable or the factory 4G64 cam gears.

If you are going with an auto transmission, the pilot bearing is different and you'll need the 64 bearing.

Other than that, everything just falls into place. The sensors bolt up and plug in, the oil pump, water pump, oil pan, oil filter housing, power steering pump/bracket/pulley, alternator, A/C compressor, and timing gear (except the belt itself) all line up and bolt on like you're using a 4G63 block. Transmission bolted up fine and the engine mounts are all the same, just use your factory stuff or aftermarket stuff for the 95-99 eclipse.

The set up yielded about a 9:1 compression which is what I wanted. I wanted the slightly higher compression because I'm not building a drag car or setting any world records, I'm building a street car. I wanted the responsiveness and will never run 35psi and make 900whp. I want a 600awhp car that is nice and comfy and I can drive it to work if I want to. Compression is 179 180 179 181 after 2000 miles.

Oil pressure is higher than stock because of the balance shafts being eliminated and the absence of oil squirters in the 64 block. I would suggest feeding your turbo with oil from the head which has considerably less pressure than the oil filter housing. I've read of people having issues with oil pressure either blowing past their turbo seals or causing CHRAs to wear excessively. Might as well just feed it from the head and use the appropriate restrictor if you're running a BB turbo.

That's about it, hope it summed up the experience for people searching on the topic down the road.

 

[MidShipCivic]

Oh dear me, what have I done, I have mocked my messiah...you have no idea what I do for a living or in my free time, I could build engines for a living, this is just more of your assumptions.

But obviously you don't. Haha .

Yes your messiah now watch it I may forgive you.

I do admit, since I don't own one I forget that that mounts are a little different on 1g's, so for that foot in mouth.
But seriously, LMFAO "take my words in like a dry sponge takes in water", your a messiah, self
proclaimed "master mechanic", and a comedian. WOW.

Thanks for the complement! Here at MSEngineering we practice practicality.

And "Lost" doesn't have anything to do with getting information from people who have done this before, I don't know if you noticed wise guy, but that's what this site is for, so then everyone is "LOST", seriously, your a riot.

Not at all, the info is there for you take it in, this tomb has been uncovered long ago.

And actually, I have searched for pictures to see what the difference is, now maybe I typed them in wrong, but nothing came up, now anyone that has done a search knows sometimes its just choice of words to get the results your looking for.

But your all knowing, so you probably have no problems with that.

Mada mada dane.. means nope not good enough.

And just like I said, thanks Delta for the only "useful" information, now I know there is some variations on the bolt pattern, from what I understand one is "wider" which mine is not....this is where if someone was going to be helpful they would assist in figuring out what the deal was, not insist they are on top of the world and know everything.

Wrong, people have been in the mix of their specialties for years decades even and still will learn something new so there isn't such thing as knowing everything.

Now if my starter plate is exactly the same, less that one bolt hole lining up, its probably not the wider Mighty Max block, maybe a different block, but not wider.

And now this is coming from someone who says "search" but assumes no one does, someone doing any searching, about 4g64 swaps would easily find that write up,

Yet even in that, there is no definitive pictures of the bolt pattern, except while its on the hoist with the trans attached, and its not 100% visible. But your the smart guy and you instantly knew.

Huh what? Interesting another min and I pulled up a pattern comparo!

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

Back on topic, I did manage to do more research as suggested and found all the info that I was missing.

See that was easy too bad someone else didn't try this .

Now, I was talking with a fellow DSMer today and mentioned the 2.4 build, he said that he wouldn't go that route due to personal choice, and that with the stroked motor the piston speed is gonna be much higher then the piston speed on 2.0. So if you were to rev your engine to 7k rpm, the piston speed would be somewhere up in the 9krpm range.

Is this true, also that the powerband would be smaller, since most of your power wouldn't come until 4k rpm, then if you're redline is 7k rpm you powerband is only 3k rpms which isn't worth it, and you would only benefit from a small turbo.

Any word on this, I've seen guys running some really good numbers on their 2.4's. Maybe he's thinking something different?

No it isn't true.

The motor isn't stroked unless it's a 4g63 block with a 4g64 crankshaft, but I get what you meant. Yeah the piston speed is higher but this doesn't hurt anything gains are everywhere and mod for mod it makes more power than 2 liter engine. This geometry is can be more suitable for the camshafts 4g63's have available.

 

[98spydert]

Now, I was talking with a fellow DSMer today and mentioned the 2.4 build, he said that he wouldn't go that route due to personal choice, and that with the stroked motor the piston speed is gonna be much higher then the piston speed on 2.0. So if you were to rev your engine to 7k rpm, the piston speed would be somewhere up in the 9krpm range.

Is this true, also that the powerband would be smaller, since most of your power wouldn't come until 4k rpm, then if you're redline is 7k rpm you powerband is only 3k rpms which isn't worth it, and you would only benefit from a small turbo.

Any word on this, I've seen guys running some really good numbers on their 2.4's. Maybe he's thinking something different?

He's thinking about the rate of acceleration of the piston as it arrives and leaves TDC or BDC. And that rate is directly related to rod:stroke ratio.

The destroked 4G64 2.1L long rod achieves the best rod to stroke ratio which is why it revs so high safely. After that, the factory stroked 4G63 is second best, and factory stroked 4G64 is third. BUT, just because it's in 3rd place of the 3 doesn't mean it's bad at all. The 4G64 will rev efficiently AND safely to the factory red line or a little further. After 8k the VE is so bad, there's no point in reving higher anyways.

So yes, if you want to rev to 9 or 10k, stay away from the the 64. You won't make any decent power vs the other combination and the acceleration rates are dangerous and you'll end up with oval rod ends at best.

 

[MidShipCivic]

And I don't know if they're worth while or not, or if you can even get them anymore but a Main Bearing Cap Alignment Dowel (MBCAD) Kit from Buscher
And I left the balance shafts out

This is only for ARP main studs. Mach V sell them.

The only additional work you'd need is the 5 extra holes on the deck plugged with freeze plugs. RRE used to suggest laying pieces of aluminum over them and using RTV as a seal.

Posted here. http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/151896425-post100.html

When combining the head and block you'll need an appropriate head gasket. I just got a 4G63 Cometic with a 87mm bore. And you'll need a 4G64 factory timing belt. The factory 4G63 cam gears sit funny but work. The timing marks line up wrong so can either compensate for this and use them anyways or switch to adjustable or the factory 4G64 cam gears.

You don't have to use a 64 timing belt when the head and block are surfaced.

Yes the 63 gears can work when set half a tooth off. Shown here http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/151907578-post106.html.

Oil pressure is higher than stock because of the balance shafts being eliminated and the absence of oil squirters in the 64 block. I would suggest feeding your turbo with oil from the head which has considerably less pressure than the oil filter housing. I've read of people having issues with oil pressure either blowing past their turbo seals or causing CHRAs to wear excessively. Might as well just feed it from the head and use the appropriate restrictor if you're running a BB turbo.

The stock turbo has a built in restrictor if you're using a stock turbocharger.

He's thinking about the rate of acceleration of the piston as it arrives and leaves TDC or BDC. And that rate is directly related to rod:stroke ratio.

The destroked 4G64 2.1L long rod achieves the best rod to stroke ratio which is why it revs so high safely. After that, the factory stroked 4G63 is second best, and factory stroked 4G64 is third. BUT, just because it's in 3rd place of the 3 doesn't mean it's bad at all. The 4G64 will rev efficiently AND safely to the factory red line or a little further. After 8k the VE is so bad, there's no point in reving higher anyways.

So yes, if you want to rev to 9 or 10k, stay away from the the 64. You won't make any decent power vs the other combination and the acceleration rates are dangerous and you'll end up with oval rod ends at best.

There isn't a best rod to stroke ratio only thing that will limit VE is the head and intake manifold. Discussed in depth here http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/newbie-forum/319012-2-6-stroker-2.html .

 

[98spydert]

Wow, you are hard to get along with aren't you? Yes, I know that's been posted earlier in the thread. Very observant of you. But now it's all summed up in a single post from start to finish without all of the petty bickering, misused terms, assumptions, and the rest of cluster #### that's made up the 4 pages of this thread.

There are no originators in this thread. If Wiseco makes a shelf part for the combo, you can bet your ass it's been done a few thousand times before. Or else we'd still be calling them with custom piston orders. If you're such an expert on the subject, you should have been helpful in the thread rather than spiteful and argumentative. But this is DSMTuners, isn't it?

And yes, there is a "best rod to stroke ratio." In fact most engine builders agree it's 1.75:1, if the breathing is optimized for the design. And different ratios effect intake and exhaust velocities, dwell times, and other factors of the intake and exhaust strokes which directly affect how efficient the cylinder is at filling with and pushing out it's contents. What type of engineer are you? WTF This is beginner shit anyone can learn through reading a book. By your fun fact there, you're saying each of these 3 engines I described could be bolted under the same head in the same car and all produce the exact same VE?

 

[MidShipCivic]

Wow, you are hard to get along with aren't you? Yes, I know that's been posted earlier in the thread. Very observant of you. But now it's all summed up in a single post from start to finish without all of the petty bickering, misused terms, assumptions, and the rest of cluster #### that's made up the 4 pages of this thread.

Since you want my opinion that is no summary that is just your experience.

There are no originators in this thread. (who said there was? ) If Wiseco makes a shelf part for the combo, you can bet your ass it's been done a few thousand times before. Or else we'd still be calling them with custom piston orders. If you're such an expert on the subject, you should have been helpful in the thread rather than spiteful and argumentative. But this is DSMTuners, isn't it?

Other than that what is your point, I've put up several facts the rest of this quote is irrelevant.

And yes, there is a "best rod to stroke ratio." In fact most engine builders agree it's 1.75:1, if the breathing is optimized for the design. And different ratios effect intake and exhaust velocities, dwell times, and other factors of the intake and exhaust strokes which directly affect how efficient the cylinder is at filling with and pushing out it's contents. What type of engineer are you? WTF This is beginner shit anyone can learn through reading a book. By your fun fact there, you're saying each of these 3 engines I described could be bolted under the same head in the same car and all produce the exact same VE?

No, there isn't a best rod to stroke ratio, if you think there is prove it. I'm not asking for your irrelevant 2 cents like you just typed just proof come back with the relative data.