4G64 Hybrid HP Gain???

[DSM93]

Okay I just replaced my cylinder head from being rebuilt and port and polished. Now after 100 miles or so I spun rod bearing #4.If I were going to go with a 4G64 Hybrid what kind of power difference should one expect.Is there any HP gain worth the hassle or not.I'm just looking at all my options before I go to the boss for approval.

 

[rdrkt]

Originally posted by DSM93
Okay I just replaced my cylinder head from being rebuilt and port and polished. Now after 100 miles or so I spun rod bearing #4.If I were going to go with a 4G64 Hybrid what kind of power difference should one expect.Is there any HP gain worth the hassle or not.I'm just looking at all my options before I go to the boss for approval.

The gain in torque is phenomenal. As Marco says "You are not ready!"

 

[DSM93]

what makes you think Im not ready? I just got back my T3/T4OE from being rebuilt and balanced why not go all out and stop messing with this 63.Im looking for numbers not remarks.

 

[Big Woo]

Go to the Magnus site, Marco has some dyno numbers posted.

www.magnusmotorsports.com

4G64

+50 horsepower
+130 ft/lbs torque

To know and not do, is the same as not knowing

 

[Cirus_93TSI]

if u dropped a magnus stage 4 4g64 into ur car with the t3/t4 u would see those munbers, but if u build up ur own and just slap ur head on a 2.4 bottom end with stock internals ur not going to see that much power gained, those numbers are based on the magnus stage 4 4g64, not simpley any 4g64, magnus does a good ammount of work building their motors and shaving every un-needed gram off the rotating weight to make their 4g64 make the numbers it does, not just any 4g64 will make the power a magnus does
but regardless of what 4g64 u get the power gains will be well worth swapping it in, especialy all the extra torque u will get

 

[littlemilla3]

So uh...is your car a DSM, I can't tell by looking at it. I bet that aluminum wing helps keep your car on the road at the high speeds you will be experiencing with that T3/T4 kit on your stock fuel pump and injectors.

 

[snake679]

The 4g64 will produce more power, and an abundance of torque...but it will not be able to rev as high. So depending on exactly what you are trying to do with it, and what other equipment you are running, it could be better, or it could be worse.

 

[snake679]

...littlemilla. Don't you know that an aluminum park bench will create more power with the stock fuel system?

 

[rdrkt]

Originally posted by snake679
The 4g64 will produce more power, and an abundance of torque...but it will not be able to rev as high. So depending on exactly what you are trying to do with it, and what other equipment you are running, it could be better, or it could be worse.

My Magnus 4g64 revs just fine to 8500. I do have all the necessary mods to be able to flow air that high though.

People are WAY too hung up on revs. There are VERY few turbo setups out there that make useable power past 8k anyway. Think about what type of turbo you would need to make big power above 8k on 64 I don’t think having the abilty to rev to 9k+ is a deal breaker to 99% of the DSMers out there.

 

[sunflashx]

The way DSM trannies are known for their fantastic high rpm shifting capabilities, I know I'd be concerned about not being able to rev to 9k.

Screw the 2.4L.

 

[Blitz]

Originally posted by rdrkt

My Magnus 4g64 revs just fine to 8500. I do have all the necessary mods to be able to flow air that high though.

People are WAY too hung up on revs. There are VERY few turbo setups out there that make useable power past 8k anyway. Think about what type of turbo you would need to make big power above 8k on 64 I don’t think having the abilty to rev to 9k+ is a deal breaker to 99% of the DSMers out there.

Just something I've notice with the stroker motors as far as I can see you will not go any faster at the track running the same amount of boost as a 2.0 motor. Your ET and mph is no better than a 2.0 motor either.

Correct me if I'm wrong though.

 

[lxlaw]

Wrong. My friend just built one. He was running a T-3 (dont know the exact specs) I know he was running 11.0@127 with 30lbs of boostn and race gas, now with the 2.4 he only has to run 15 lbs on pump gas to do the same thing. The turbo used to go full spool at about 4200 and now with the 2.4 he has full boost under 3500.

 

[Blitz]

Originally posted by lxlaw
Wrong. My friend just built one. He was running a T-3 (dont know the exact specs) I know he was running 11.0@127 with 30lbs of boostn and race gas, now with the 2.4 he only has to run 15 lbs on pump gas to do the same thing. The turbo used to go full spool at about 4200 and now with the 2.4 he has full boost under 3500.

If I remember right rdrkt is running 30psi with his stroker and has run a best of 11.2@130, so how is your friend going faster with half as much boost as Dave? What does your friends car weigh?

 

[rdrkt]

Originally posted by Blitz
Correct me if I'm wrong though.

Well Im still trying to figure some of this out myself. I have a heavy ass car and I did an 11.3@131 at Norwalk with a 1.99 60ft. This in a heavy car and I have only been to the track twice on c16 including Norwalk. My tuning is VERY conservative mid 11s afr 21 degrees of timing on c16. I don’t think there are many cars out there that can run those types of times with that much weight with a crappy 60ft like that. Walking around the pits at Norwalk there are VERY few cars out there that are has heavy as mine and no one is stupid enough to run on the 17in Kuhmo 712s that I have.

I would tend to agree that the benefits of the 64 can be best seen on the track. I think the real draw for this car is having a crazy/street strip car. I get 30lbs of boost around 4300 on my gt40 with the t350 turbine and the .82ar exhaust housing. That is freaking phenomenal for a turbo of that size. It makes the car VERY easy to take down the track. When I was running the big 60-1 on the 2L I would have to do the 1-2 shift at about 8500 so I wouldn’t bog. Now my biggest problem is spinning the tires all the way through first and second.
The car is also pretty damn streetable besides the prothane mounts. I think my car fits the definition of a 10 sec street car VERY well.

Plus the fact that it makes really nice pump gas power. I did 126 traps at only 23lbs of boost and 18 degrees timing in 100 degree weather.

Maybe someone a little bit crazier and a better than me will go out there and really prove what’s up. To me running low 11s my first time to the track with no dyno tuning is a testament to how well this car works. Im pretty sure the next time I head out to the track on my new tires 10s are a lock if I don’t break. If I can do 10.8@133+ at this weight I think I will have made the case for the Magnus 4g64

 

[sunflashx]

Originally posted by Blitz


Just something I've notice with the stroker motors as far as I can see you will not go any faster at the track running the same amount of boost as a 2.0 motor. Your ET and mph is no better than a 2.0 motor either.

Correct me if I'm wrong though.

Peak HP won't increase without changing the turbo if you are getting close to the maximum out of your setup you can get.

You will spool the turbo faster and make more power sooner in the rpm band than with a 2.0. More power under the curve. On a smaller turbo that had next to no respool time, probably no difference.

On pump gas you can flow more air at lower boost levels and around town driveability should be better. Less of a turd with the AC on I would think.

 

[spoolints04]

3180lbs with me in it. I'm the one Lxlaw is talking about. My car went 11.01@128 with a friggin 1.86 60 footer I could not get the car hook at all. This was with the 4G63 on C16 with alot of knock. (34 counts) at 30 lbs. So,, I'm not huge fan of race gas, so I built the 64 in hopes that I could run close to those times on pump gas. I would have ran it two weeks ago but my oil pump decided to fail backing out of the garage. It had 349 miles on it.
Anyway, I'm thinking it will be good for 11.20's or so on pump gas. Reason I say this, well I ran a stang (good friend) that runs 11.60's on motor, 9.70's on the shiz. He didn't have any nitrous so we went at. I was running 15-16 lbs boost, granny shifting saving my tranny for the track. Very easy win by two cars, Everytime I'd shift he come back up on me, so If I was bangin the gears I'm sure it would have been 4 or 5 cars. I love the 2.4, it makes my turbo feel like a small turbo, I getting 15 lbs by 3400, instead of 4500. Traction is better, Not having to come out at 6k to 7k makes a big difference. I don't have to shift at 9k anymore, 7500 is all I have to turn it. It loves pump gas, I have run 18 lbs so far and got a max of 6 counts of knock from launch to finish. It does move alot more air, so it needs alot of fuel. I'll have some track times soon. Damn oil pump.


A 4G64 (2.4) IS NOT A STROKER MOTOR, that's like calling a 4G63 (2.0) a stroker.

 

[rdrkt]

What turbo are you running?

 

[swordfish]

Originally posted by spoolints04
A 4G64 (2.4) IS NOT A STROKER MOTOR, that's like calling a 4G63 (2.0) a stroker.

Unless you build one like mine.

jeff

 

[swordfish]

Originally posted by rdrkt
What turbo are you running?

Dave. Check out his name.

jeff

 

[DSM93]

Hey Littlemilla3 fuel system has been upgraded since I first joined. Ill update my profile just for you.and the wing was a gift from my wife so dont crack on it, you will hurt her feelings.

 

[spoolints04]

rdrkt,
It's a 62-1 behind a T04E cover, Stage 5 turbine in a .63 ex housing. Prolly not the best turbo for my aplication, but it works. I'd sure like a T-70 with a P-trim. But I'm still trying to keep it as streetable as prossible.

 

[hose101772]

So,, I'm not huge fan of race gas, so I built the 64 in hopes that I could run close to those times on pump gas. I would have ran it two weeks ago but my oil pump decided to fail backing out of the garage. It had 349 miles on it.
Anyway, I'm thinking it will be good for 11.20's or so on pump gas. Reason I say this, well I ran a stang (good friend) that runs 11.60's on motor, 9.70's on the shiz. He didn't have any nitrous so we went at. I was running 15-16 lbs boost, granny shifting saving my tranny for the track. [/B]

Glad to see others subscribe to hose theory of break-in.Better to break now than later-----because im still near the house.

Dude thats killer to hear,11's, as my 2.4 nears completion.Well almost, a few more $2000 chunks at it and it should be done.

Well since spoolin has a .63 and rdrtk has .82 -is there anything in between or ?.Does the .82 spool soon enough or?Just asking as turbo will be my next purchase.Mostly street use btw.Thanks.

 

[122andy]

Originally posted by rdrkt


Maybe someone a little bit crazier and a better than me will go out there and really prove what’s up. To me running low 11s my first time to the track with no dyno tuning is a testament to how well this car works. Im pretty sure the next time I head out to the track on my new tires 10s are a lock if I don’t break. If I can do 10.8@133+ at this weight I think I will have made the case for the Magnus 4g64

Exactly how heavy is your car? There are probably more guys than you think out there running around that are in the same boat as you. All that carbon fiber hood/light wheels/light brakes/light seats crap adds up, I sure cant afford it!

Im still not totally sold on the 2.4s yet. I guess we need to take every little advantage we can get, but its by no means a solve-all to power. Lots of fast guys still use 2.0s. I still think about Als car from over 2 years ago, how absolutely simple it was. Stock bore 2.0(the block never even left the engine compartment!), stock rods, 95 pistons, Red turbo, 2-221 IC, stock intake manifold, and a 1G hacked MAS and AFC for fuel control. As far as weight he still had A/C, PS, full interior except back seats, factory hood, factory brakes, etc, etc. It was by no means some tin canned lightweight car.

Think about how far everything has come since then. Hacked MAS and AFC, what is that? 2-221 IC, thats only good for 16Gs, right? Stock intake and 10sec slips, you gotta be kiddin me!? There are umpteen turbos now on the market that will run the Red into the ground *on paper*. Even at that his car would still consistantly knock down 10.7-10.80s at 130-131 mph, and went as good as 10.56. Exactly how far have we come?

We took my brothers car to the SO for its maiden voyage, its a "heavy-ass" car if you will, also. Basically the same setup as Als with a few differences. Car still managed 11.32 at 128mph by its 3rd pass even with various issues. He was happy with that and put it back on the trailer and went home with a car that wasnt broken. That was the first time it had ever had race gas in it or even saw over 20 psi. Not too bad considering all the money some of the street cars have in them to run similar numbers. I feel its got more in it(ahh, benchracing) and think it will do just fine against all the high-tech latest greatest stuff out there.

 

[awd4bangr]

Originally posted by swordfish


Unless you build one like mine.

jeff

Jeff, Are you changing the stroke on your engine or just using long rods and modified ring pack pistons? Long rods alone do not put it in the stroker class. You wouldn't be changing the stroke, just the rod ratio.

 

[A. Van]

Are you guys using the Magnus 2.4L or are you building a 2.4L from the galant...or using a Hyundai 2.4L block, which from what I was told is pretty much the same as a 6-bolt 2L.