Engine Identification 98 Eclipse Spyder NT

[150MPHSpyder]

okay basic first question, i bought a dog slow 1998 eclipse spyder convertible, the engine tag on the firewall is completely unreadable. what i can tell you is it is a 1998 spyder with a 16 valve engine in it, so tell me what is this engine. There is no signs of GS/GST ever being on the car so i believe it to be a plain jane spyder with a 16 valve engine. what motor is this ? how big is this engine? 2.0 or 2.4 ?? secondly im debating wheather a mitsubishi 3000 6cyl would fit in it no seriously i just need to know the motor code so i can figure out what mods if any are available. I mean i got out run by a volkswagon the other day. my top speed was like 115mph and it took time to get there. and yes it is a Automatic trransmission ugggh!

 

[Kirby]

Well it is a 4g64 I believe. It is the non turbo cousin to the 4g63 powerplant in the 1g N/T's. I do believe they were 2.4L though. Those cars are very heavy when compared to the coupe (even the coupes could stand to loose some weight.

 

[clownface]

2.4L SOHC 4g64 about 140 HP, its a POS, jk..........sorta.........

mitsubishi 3000 6cyl, bad idea plain and simple, its been done though i think, I THINK, the picture may have been a photoshop. Thats an even worse idea then swaping in a 4g63 into a 420a. I could explain why but i dont feel like typing that much right now.

 

[jadamc]

Originally posted by clownface
2.4L SOHC 4g64 about 140 HP, its a POS, jk..........sorta.........

Slow stock, but tons of potential.

 

[clownface]

Originally posted by jadamc
Slow stock, but tons of potential.

i dunno man, considering we keep the engines stock(cause once you do internals its not even really the same engine), i dont think it has that much potential compaired to say a 4g63 or something like a 4g63, i think ill go out on a limb and say it has alot less(i see the flames coming my way)

my friend has a 2002 GS eclipse, 4g64, its slow as balls and he knows it.

 

[jadamc]

Originally posted by clownface
i dunno man, considering we keep the engines stock(cause once you do internals its not even really the same engine), i dont think it has that much potential compaired to say a 4g63 or something like a 4g63, i think ill go out on a limb and say it has alot less(i see the flames coming my way)

my friend has a 2002 GS eclipse, 4g64, its slow as balls and he knows it.

You do realize that it's just a stroked version of the 4g63 with a single cam head? There are a few people who have swapped it into their 1g awd and put the dohc 4g63 head on it.

 

[clownface]

okay, yeah iknow this.....just because the bottom end makes a good mate for the 4g63 top end dont mean the 4g64 engine is any good. When people take the bottom end off the 4g64 and put it with a 4g63 then you have a hybrid engine, not a 4g64, so i still say the 4g64 engine isnt a very good engine.

 

[jadamc]

Originally posted by clownface
okay, yeah iknow this.....just because the bottom end makes a good mate for the 4g63 top end dont mean the 4g64 engine is any good. When people take the bottom end off the 4g64 and put it with a 4g63 then you have a hybrid engine, not a 4g64, so i still say the 4g64 engine isnt a very good engine.

Ok I'm lost.

I said potential. It has the potential to be a fast engine. Even if it's mated with a 4g63 head, it still is a 4g64. And on top of that it's a 2.4L DOHC which loves turbo's.

Also from what I understand, a stock turbo is a bolt-on for a 4g64.

 

[clownface]

nah i disagree, the 4g64 bottom on a 4g63 top dosnt=4g64, it equals a hybrid 4g63/4g64, and thats not what im talking about, im talking about just a plain old 4g64 and i dont think a 4g64 has much potential.

 

[clownface]

o yeah something else ive seen...the 4g64 spyder has a very limited aftermarket.

 

[jadamc]

Originally posted by clownface
o yeah something else ive seen...the 4g64 spyder has a very limited aftermarket.

It doesn't have to have huge aftermarket support, most of the 4g63 parts are interchangeable.

 

[droppedspyder]

I have a 1999 Spyder GS, I am in the process of ripping off the head, installing a 96 GSX head, and quite possibly the turbo. There are a few people out there with websites on the head swap and there is another with the turbo so I just thought what the hell, I am gonna do both!
I will keep you all updated here on this post with pic of the swap!!!

BTW here is pics of my car be4 the head and turbo!

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

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

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

 

[clownface]

see, this is an example of what im talking about, the 4g64 engine is not desirable, this 4g64 owner is making a hybrid out of it, witch will be much more desirable once its done.

 

[droppedspyder]

Thats right!!! Much better now that I have something to work with. Race Engineering has a set of pistons for the 4g64 for only $395

 

[jadamc]

Originally posted by clownface
see, this is an example of what im talking about, the 4g64 engine is not desirable, this 4g64 owner is making a hybrid out of it, witch will be much more desirable once its done.

Only the head is not desirable. Most people would like to build a hybrid version in their awd... making the 4g63 not desirable.

 

[clownface]

really? is that why most people dont have a 2.4 hybrid and still run good times on the POS 4g63, man sheps 4g63 must suck ass then, right, since its not a hybrid engine, right? okay so the bottom end is good, but the rest of the thing sucks and that makes the 4g64 engine suck, whenyou have to swap another engine into it to make it worth anything its not a good engine. Are you dumb or something?

 

[DSMFever]

The 4G64 block is a strong block. Like everyone has been saying it is similar to the 4G63T but has a longer stroke. There are a few hybrids built here in the South and they are very strong 4G63/64 hybrids that re turbo'd. The GS spyder has lots of potential, but you must be willing to work for it a lil bit.

 

[clownface]

maybe im not saying it right or something...i dunno...i think the car has potential, but the 4g64 engine is what holds it back, if you turn that 4g64 engine into a 4g64/3 then youve got something going for ya. A 4g63/64=really good, a 4g64=not very good. i dunno how else to say it.

 

[droppedspyder]

K, dude, I don't think you are getting the point. I am doing a head swap and turbo....yes I don't have to do it, but to save me some headaches I am doing both steps at once. You can do one or the other.....the 4g64 stock is not really that bad. I ran 17.24 @ 81mph in Boise completely stock. I now made my own intake and had a custom cat back exhaust put on. I also port and polished the exhaust runners and part of my stock header. You know just a few tweaks I can keep right with a stock v6 mustang. It might not be the fastest thing around, but I need a little go to go with my show!

 

[DSMFever]

They have a 2.4 SOHC engine with 140 hp and 141 pounds of torque they are not the fastest engines around. But they have some possibility. There are many different things you can do with them. Magnus sells many parts for the engine without doing a head-swap. You can build the internals and be able to rev the hell out of that engine. It has good torque and a good displacement, you can take advantage of both of those aspects on that engine. It isn't the best car, BUT is is a good engine. I know everyone has thier opinions but, don't knock the engine if you haven't owned one or have driven one and know for sure. That's just my two cents.

 

[clownface]

okay.......you do realize that 17 is slow right? GST and GSX can make it into the 14s stock, and maybe no one told you but v6 stangs are slow also....all im trying to say is the 4g64 is slow unless you make some major changes under that hood, but after all that its not really a 4g64 anymore.....i dunno, i give up. i have drove a 4g64 car, not a spyder though. i guess ill stop now, maybe its just that i dont like SOHC and own a GSX so my opinions are prolly alittle biased or w/e.

 

[DSMFever]

Yes, I agree 17 is a slow time for the quarter mile. I am not saying it is any where as good as the GS-T but, it is a good engine. I just think you shouldn't just say it is horrible. It has its good points. It is a good base point for a engine. The GS-T is a heavy car and the GS Spyder is even heavier.

 

[droppedspyder]

K, I dunno if you noticed or not.....I WAS STOCK!!!!!! We have a guy who drives a GSX knocking on a ghey slow motor.....whoa, cool. I don't care to be like everyone else and drive a 4g63 with the t on the end! It's kinda like all the ### HONDA guys selling their JE Pistons and Eagle rods for Civic Type R pistons and a front lip with a little carbon fiber on it. It's called a bandwagon and you will see me shooting arrows at it from my covered wagon (Convertible Eclipse)

 

[clownface]

wow, okay, im sorry for bashing the 4g64, the main thing i wanted to get across what that a 4g64/63 isnt a 4g64, its a 4g63/64 hybrid, thats all really..sorry for bashing 4g64.

 

[Venum]

Originally posted by clownface
wow, okay, im sorry for bashing the 4g64, the main thing i wanted to get across what that a 4g64/63 isnt a 4g64, its a 4g63/64 hybrid, thats all really..sorry for bashing 4g64.

So you're saying that the 4g63/4 has a lot of potential. I agree, but since he did not do an ENGINE swap (he replaced a PART) one might say that it is still a 4g64....which, as you stated above, has a lot of potential.


P.S. If you have a 1g and put in a 2g part it does not make it a 2g hybrid does it now? Likewise: if you replace the head from a 4g63 on to a 4g64 it does not make it a 4g63.