What Engine should i use?

[dthquazi1]

I am doing the colt swap and i want something good under the hood. I was thinking about a 2.3l Stroker(and still kinda am) but i dont know how well i will be able to get the wheels to connect to the ground with the added torwue. I am thinking this will be a top end engine swap so what should i do?

 

[NosLaser]

I could be wrong, but I don't think the 2.3L Stroker adds any torwue. Just go with the 4G63T out of an early 1G DSM.

Regards,

 

[dthquazi1]

the stroker adds torque and quite a bit of it. I know the 2.4 with the 63 crank revs high but that wont bolt into a colt or what not. I want something powerfull with good top end power. My just some upgraded pistons and rods for the 63t?

 

[DSM mechanix]

Originally posted by NosLaser
I could be wrong, but I don't think the 2.3L Stroker adds any torwue. Just go with the 4G63T out of an early 1G DSM.

The 2.3 stroker and the 2.4 add a good amount of torque... Torque that will make finding traction in that colt hard to get when at WOT (so Ive heard from the guy that turboed his 2.4 spyder, and the colt is lighter...).

I know the 2.4 with the 63 crank revs high but that wont bolt into a colt or what not. I want something powerfull with good top end power. My just some upgraded pistons and rods for the 63t?

Id suggest the 2.1 long rod hybrid that you have mentioned. Why wont it bolt into a colt? If you can bolt a 4G63 in a colt you can bot the long rod engine in...

If it is because your 6-bolt (that why?) there is a 6-bolt 2.4 block out of late 80's galants and some Hyundai's that will work. There are long rods (156mm, and 162mm) avalibe from Magnus Motorsports and 4G64 pistons and 4G63 stroker pistons overbore up to .080".

Using 162mm rods, you will get a 1.84 rod/stroke ratio (stock '63 is 1.7) in adition to the added .1 liters of displacement due to the larger bore...

 

[dsmturboawd]

just buy a 6 bolt motor for 300 and be done with it.

christ, a stock 4g63 will provide you with more than you'd ever want in a fwd colt.

 

[NosLaser]

You guys make me sad. Please RE-READ his post, and then RE-READ my post. This time, use your supreme analytical skills to check the spelling of the word that is supposed to say 'torque' that is actually spelled 'torwue'. Then, the statement 'the 2.3L Stroker doesn't really add any torwue' will perhaps make sense to you this time around. Man, you guys couldn't spot sarcasm if it fell out of the sky, hit you in the face and wiggled.

Regards,

 

[dthquazi1]

well most of use on this forum have other things to do and do read or type everything to a tee let alone go around correcting or making sarcastic reamarks about them. I wanted an honest answer with some knowledge behind it. A stock 4g63t will yield the same power in a colt as in a dsm it is just 500 lbs lighter. Who leaves a stock? I want a good powerful motor. Not the average 4g63t that i am used to as is in my gsx.


Now there was a point made with the 4g64. I dont know what mounts to use. Since the mounts are diff. for a 63 in a colt and eclipses need diff. mounts for the 64 swap? Then what mounts are needed for a colt? Does that make any sense?

 

[NosLaser]

Unless you are building a purpose built race car, just use a 4G63 out of an early 6 bolt DSM. Period. That is an honest answer. See, what you kids fail to understand is that having a high powered short-wheelbase car with a high center of gravity isn't the safest combination in the world. Sure, if you put a 900HP Single Turbo Supra motor into a Toyota Starlet it's going to haul ass, but I sure ain't getting into that car. How much power are you looking to make? What are you using the car for? The ONLY reason to go with a stroker motor in any type of DSM is if you plan on trying to make more power than you could feasibly make with the 2.0L. So far, nobody with a stroker motor is doing that so the 'need' for a stroker hasn't proven itself to be all that neccessary. All you are going to do with a stroker motor in a Colt is make the tires spin worse. I guess a stroker would be useful if you don't want to rev to the higher rpm needed to make big horsepower with a small displacement large turbo motor. If you tell me you are looking to make 400HP then I laugh at the fact that you even considered a stroker in the first place. Make sense?

Regards,

 

[DSM mechanix]

Originally posted by NosLaser


Unless you are building a purpose built race car, just use a 4G63 out of an early 6 bolt DSM. Period. That is an honest answer. See, what you kids fail to understand is that having a high powered short-wheelbase car with a high center of gravity isn't the safest combination in the world. Sure, if you put a 900HP Single Turbo Supra motor into a Toyota Starlet it's going to haul ass, but I sure ain't getting into that car. How much power are you looking to make? What are you using the car for? The ONLY reason to go with a stroker motor in any type of DSM is if you plan on trying to make more power than you could feasibly make with the 2.0L. So far, nobody with a stroker motor is doing that so the 'need' for a stroker hasn't proven itself to be all that neccessary. All you are going to do with a stroker motor in a Colt is make the tires spin worse. I guess a stroker would be useful if you don't want to rev to the higher rpm needed to make big horsepower with a small displacement large turbo motor. If you tell me you are looking to make 400HP then I laugh at the fact that you even considered a stroker in the first place. Make sense?

Regards,

Makes ALOT of sense!

I had just wanted to touch on the 2.1L idea since he had mention it...

One thing you have still neglected to tell us is what year/generation colt will this engine be put in?

This link may help alittle for install purposes... seekthelight.jcsmp3s.com/mirage/

 

[dthquazi1]

i am putting it into a 88-92. And you may laugh at me but it was just a consideration. I only plan on having enough hp and torque. There are no limits as of yet so thats why i am takin in all considerations. I want a powerful daily driver. True a stroker is a little unnessesarybut it is original around here and fairly cheap to do for fairly easy power gains over a stock 4g63.

 

[ImportWarrior]

2.4

 

[NosLaser]

Aww, isn't that cute? A diehard import guy replied just so he could use the term 'hybrid.' I'm surprised you didn't work JDM, J spec, Stage 3, or euro into that extremely lucid post you have there.

Regards,

 

[ImportWarrior]

wiseman??? you sure do represent the roll DB.

 

[NosLaser]

And you represent the ROLE of your typical import thug wannabe.

Regards,

 

[nine5raptor]

Originally posted by ImportWarrior
wiseman??? you sure do represent the roll DB.

He has done far more than you ever will with dsms.

 

[ImportWarrior]

look i did not come here for trouble. you cut me down because you had nothing better to do. why do you have to be that way? i did nothing to you that i know of other than reply to a post offering my opinion on what i would do. please leave me alone i dont cut you down on your replies.

thanks DB.

 

[dthquazi1]

Originally posted by ImportWarrior
2.4

2.4 or 2.4 with 4g63 crank?

 

[ImportWarrior]

im done i dont want to deal with that DB

thanks

 

[DSM mechanix]

Aslan is right about the engine, all you need is a stock 6-bolt engine. If you feel that you need a rebuild, use some '95 pistons (8.5:1 C/R). That will hold more than enough for your car...

Remember, XXXhp will do more in your car than said hp in a dsm .

 

[slowpokin699]

seroiusly man... this is just something you are gonna have to decide for yourself... it's probably not a good idea to go asking people what engine platform you should use, you should probably work on making goals for yourself and then figuring out what will get you there. i have a colt myself and am gonna do the swap as soon as the galant rehabilitation procedure is completed... i'm looking to go with the 2.0 because i want to be able to rev it high and race the car on the highway mostly (it's fwd for god's sake) you prolly dont want larger displacement and more torque since wheel hop/traction are already the biggest issue with the c/s/m's

 

[dthquazi1]

i want mine to be a freeway machine thats why im leanign towards a 64 hybrid. they can rev to like 10 but 8 is fine for me and a tranny.

 

[NosLaser]

ImportWarrior,

I apologize. You are right, that was uncalled for.

Regards,

 

[DSM mechanix]

Originally posted by NosLaser
ImportWarrior,

I apologize. You are right, that was uncalled for.

Regards,

An honorable man...

Also ImportWarrior, nice job on not continuing the fight.

 

[MNGSX]

If you are doing a colt just use a 2.0.

It's FWD and low end torque will just produce more wheel spin.

You want a peakier engine for that so once it gets moving it can make up for not hooking up. Unless you are going full FWD drag with it and having front tires like a drag civic... This means raxles as well. Then use a 2.4 if you feel like it. IMHO if I had an AWD street and autox car I'd 2.4 it. Otherwise 2.0.

Yes rod ratio should be looked at but it is'nt as big of a deal as conn rod mfg's make it out to be. Stroke length has 100x more effect on piston speed and rod angle than rod length.