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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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!
Quote:
Originally Posted by infinite_kaos
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 .
Quote:
Originally Posted by infinite_kaos
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.
____________________________
David Steele.
MSEngineering D27A.
Last edited by MidShipCivic; 07-02-2009 at 04:37 AM.
Advertisement
To browse the forums without the advertisements above, Login/Register
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.
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.
Quote:
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.
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.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 98spydert
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 2.6 Stroker?? .
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? 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?
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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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? 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.
David, I'm sure everyone reading this thread could benefit from a little less hostility. You're a bright enough fellow when it comes to mechanical things, but you constantly tend to deal with people with all the friendliness of a rabid badger. Your arrogance is astounding. Why do you have so much distaste for the members of this site yet you continue to post here?
You may have something quite valuable to add, but you present it in such a way that many times I'd rather not even read what you posted. You seem to demand perfect explanations of every detail from anyone with a different understanding than you (but offer only short one liners of your own), and then you sit back and pick their posts apart and mock them for it. Maybe this attitude passes for intelligence on some other site, but here it just makes you look like a bit of a pretentious jerk. Which we all know you're really not.
I'm not asking for you to sugar coat and kiss ass, I'm just asking you to tolerate and help instead of insult and discourage. Little respect begets little respect.
David, I'm sure everyone reading this thread could benefit from a little less hostility. You're a bright enough fellow when it comes to mechanical things, but you constantly tend to deal with people with all the friendliness of a rabid badger. Your arrogance is astounding. Why do you have so much distaste for the members of this site yet you continue to post here? No distaste, but entertainment and basic fundamentals!
You may have something quite valuable to add, but you present it in such a way that many times I'd rather not even read what you posted. You seem to demand perfect explanations of every detail from anyone with a different understanding than you (but offer only short one liners of your own) (You forgot adequate) and then you sit back and pick their posts apart and mock them for it. ( but at the same time someone who wants to know can find that fine* detail for their swap) Maybe this attitude passes for intelligence on some other site, but here it just makes you look like a bit of a pretentious jerk. Which we all know you're really not.
Quote:
I'm not asking for you to sugar coat and kiss ass, I'm just asking you to tolerate and help instead of insult and discourage. Little respect begets little respect.
< Yin cannot be without its Yang ^. The interaction of the two give birth to new things.
Well I've done more research on this and other sites and found that the 2.4 would best suit my needs.
I would prefer to not have to rev to 8k+ rpm. Given the gearing in these 1g trannies, it justy doesn't seem smart to rev past factory redline.
The 2.1 as I have read would be the hbighest revving engine, which is awesome, but mainly if you want to be at the track, not necessarily on the street.
Either way, I can honestly say that the information passed in this thread was not helpful in my quest for finding the right parts, or any valid information really. Especially in the last page and this one.
98SpyderT thanks for the info, as I do believe there is an optimal rod to stroke ratio for certain applications.
MidShipcivic, for a second there I actually thought you were just having a prob with one individual, but seems like you have a problem with the world. Hitler had the same problem, don't end up like that guy. Just because someone doesn't agree with you and your wording doesn't make them wrong or make you even more right. I agree with what your friend said, and feel he gave you some good advice for this forum. but its up to you to take it or not.
However, any info you pass will be taken with a grain of salt. Good Job
Since you want my opinion that is no summary that is just your experience.
It's more than you offered newb. Have you even started your engine yet?
Quote:
Other than that what is your point, I've put up several facts the rest of this quote is irrelevant.
Your words are not fact. You are but one of thousands who have attempted this build. I see 2 useful pictures posted in this thread followed by immature, irrelevant ramblings of some child who hates the internet yet can't tear himself away You're laughable at best dude, find a new hobby. Maybe complete that engineering degree you're e-faking.
Quote:
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.
Your word is not fact. You want to disprove something I said, feel free. Come back with the relative data, not your irrelevant and insignificant 2 cents.
While you're at it, learn how to multi-quote a thread there "engineer." A little grammar, punctuation, and tact wouldn't hurt either if you want people to pay attention to you.
Oh boy! Priceless, quite honestly I thought for a second maybe I was overreacting, and taking it too personally...appears I am not the only one.
I already added him to my ignore list after my last post, but it looks like I should go take it off to read his useless babble, but I would rather not, because from the last three posts, I don't think I could top any of that, it was so well said by everyone.
Big hand to Infinite, Delta (who in which I am sorry to hear your associated) and 98spydert! :claps hands:
Anyways because I agree there was no information in here not found by a small search, I only posted in this as to avoid starting another thread, due to the fact that I hate search for something and sifting through 28,774,698 threads.
But 98spyder I very much appreciate your information, it good to hear someone in here has completed it and is willing to share information, not how "smart" they are.
I understand everything goes together the same, the block was my concern, how if the only other one is wider, yet mine is not, but the hole is off.
The block was built already when I got it, which was upsetting but at the time I got it, which was almost a year ago now, I could not find one, or was having trouble.
But say this, if it is a 4g64 block with all the internals in it, rods, pistons, arp hardware, new 4g64 crank, I could just go try and find a bare 64' block now, and swap parts......?
Now also I want to use my 95 head, I will have a port job done, valves, retainers, ect. but, do you not have to do some sort of sensor modification, via the write up already linked in Hitler's post? Or is that only with the 1g 7 bolt head, since it has the cam sensor?
Also what kind of valve train/cam combo do you have in yours? I have been hearing good results form the fp3's in a stroker/2.4 engine. Confirmation?
It is good to see people like Infinite who came here to find things out, were not turned away by peoples self delusions of grandeur, arrogance, and like 98 said (which was very well put) lack of tact, until someone put some good information in.
Thanks again. For a second I thought this was dsmtalk..
Oh boy! Priceless, quite honestly I thought for a second
I understand everything goes together the same, the block was my concern, how if the only other one is wider, yet mine is not, but the hole is off.
This is typical of one of the holes to be off on it. Happened with mine. I think it happens in every build with the 4g64 lol. Atleast from what i have read it does
Quote:
But say this, if it is a 4g64 block with all the internals in it, rods, pistons, arp hardware, new 4g64 crank, I could just go try and find a bare 64' block now, and swap parts......?
You could do this. But what would the point be? You would then have to measure all the clearnces for the bearings. Use assembly grease with it and replace any gaskets. Personally this sounds like a waste of time to do and a little waste of money.
Quote:
Now also I want to use my 95 head, I will have a port job done, valves, retainers, ect. but, do you not have to do some sort of sensor modification, via the write up already linked in Hitler's post? Or is that only with the 1g 7 bolt head, since it has the cam sensor?
You can use your 95 head. And the 95 head does have a cam sensor. Basically this comes down to if you are using the 6bolt 4g64(G4Cs) or the 7bolt 4g64
This is typical of one of the holes to be off on it. Happened with mine. I think it happens in every build with the 4g64 lol. Atleast from what i have read it does
Thank you!! See that was not so hard, too bad everyone who has completed it can't just answer questions when people ask them.
Were you ever able to peek at yours?
They re-assembling of the block would not concern me, I would not mind at least, I would just rather the thing bolt to the trans like it is suppose to, everything I have read would lead me to believe it is straight bolt together. To me that means EXACTLY the same as the 2.0, so if indeed I had to tear it down and transfer parts it would not kill me.
I realize the 95+ head has the sensor (is it not on one of the gears?), but with the 95 head, or really any head for that matter, is anything needed to make it properly work with the different block, like in the link already posted he used a 1g 7 bolt head, but had to modify the wire to make it run correctly.
I have an extra 95 head, so ideally I would like to just use that.
Big hand to Infinite, Delta (who in which I am sorry to hear your associated) and 98spydert! :claps hands:
...Thanks again. For a second I thought this was dsmtalk..
I'm not associated with him. I've never met him, but I've crossed paths with him elsewhere on the internet. You already know too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by g_ferg
This is typical of one of the holes to be off on it. Happened with mine. I think it happens in every build with the 4g64 lol.
Everyone I've talked to that has done this has had this issue as well. It's just one bolt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuzzydoodle
I realize the 95+ head has the sensor (is it not on one of the gears?), but with the 95 head, or really any head for that matter, is anything needed to make it properly work with the different block, like in the link already posted he used a 1g 7 bolt head, but had to modify the wire to make it run correctly.
I have an extra 95 head, so ideally I would like to just use that.
You should be fine with a 95 or 96 head and CAS if you're using a 95 or 96 ECU. The only difference is when the CAS doesn't match the ECU being used, 95-96 DSMs had a CAS on the opposite side of the head and so it produces a signal that is exactly backwards from the signals produced by the 1G and 97+ sensors. This is also why we swap plug/injector wires when we swap 95 Eproms into 97+ cars for ECMLink.
Thank you!! See that was not so hard, too bad everyone who has completed it can't just answer questions when people ask them.
Were you ever able to peek at yours?
They re-assembling of the block would not concern me, I would not mind at least, I would just rather the thing bolt to the trans like it is suppose to, everything I have read would lead me to believe it is straight bolt together. To me that means EXACTLY the same as the 2.0, so if indeed I had to tear it down and transfer parts it would not kill me.
I realize the 95+ head has the sensor (is it not on one of the gears?), but with the 95 head, or really any head for that matter, is anything needed to make it properly work with the different block, like in the link already posted he used a 1g 7 bolt head, but had to modify the wire to make it run correctly.
I have an extra 95 head, so ideally I would like to just use that.
The head just bolted on, no problems, no modification. The 2G ARP or stock head studs fit the block and head. And all of the sensors just plug in. RRE has a "how to" on their site about how to make a 97-99 head or 1G head work on a 95-99 car, but it looks like a pain in the ass. I would just have a good 3 or 5 angle valve job done, port and polish, and gasket match to whatever manifold you want to use.
I've been screwing with DSMs for 10 years, Bolt on installation is priceless to me anymore lol.
Oh, and your single bolt that's off is typical. Mine had the lowest bolt on the front side of the engine that didn't line up. Looks like yours is the same. The way I looked at it was it's only one and it's right next to the engine mount. Could be worse I guess.
I was going to drill the threads out of the engine side and put a bolt in backwards by drilling into the bell housing and tapping it. But the housing isn't really thick enough to support a big bolt if it were to see any real lateral force.
1x 1/2", located in the front, passenger side corner of the block.
2x 11/16", located on the front edge of the block.
2x 5/8", located on the rear edge of the block.
Even though midship is dick, he does have the holes filled in the best way possible in the picture he added. Tapping the block and using threaded plugs is the way to go. I'm using water plugs and tapping them in, which will work fine because there is little pressure (only blow by) coming through those passages. I would use threaded plugs but my engine is assembled and I don't want to risk metal shavings contaminating the engine. If you're at the bare block stage, thread the holes. Might as well
The head just bolted on, no problems, no modification. The 2G ARP or stock head studs fit the block and head. And all of the sensors just plug in. RRE has a "how to" on their site about how to make a 97-99 head or 1G head work on a 95-99 car, but it looks like a pain in the ass. I would just have a good 3 or 5 angle valve job done, port and polish, and gasket match to whatever manifold you want to use.
Yeah, that's ideally what I would like to do, that's good to hear it bolts right together.
I had only been looking at the 1g 7 bolt, but I had an extra 95 head, and figured I would use that. I already have the 7 bolt head studs I got a year and a half ago to put in (huge procrastinator), and their already in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 98spydert
Oh, and your single bolt that's off is typical. Mine had the lowest bolt on the front side of the engine that didn't line up. Looks like yours is the same. The way I looked at it was it's only one and it's right next to the engine mount. Could be worse I guess.
That's the best news I have heard yet! So not only is it typical for one bolt, but at least now I know someone has gone through with the "same" exact block.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 98spydert
I was going to drill the threads out of the engine side and put a bolt in backwards by drilling into the bell housing and tapping it. But the housing isn't really thick enough to support a big bolt if it were to see any real lateral force.
This I think I understood, you wanted to put a bolt through the block toward the trans, and drill/tap, the trans to bolt up, reverse what it would have been right? , now that I re-read through that, that sounds retarded because that's what you were saying but I will leave it there, for research's sake.
So with yours bolted up, minus that one hole, you had a total of four bolts connecting the block to trans correct?
1x 1/2", located in the front, passenger side corner of the block.
2x 11/16", located on the front edge of the block.
2x 5/8", located on the rear edge of the block.
Thanks for going through so much detail, yes I have seen numerous pics on that so I am good there, but again, thank you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 98spydert
Even though midship is a dick, he does have the holes filled in the best way possible in the picture he added.
I just wanted to quote that because it made me laugh so hard.
But yeah, ideally tapping them, and using screws/bolts/whatever. But the block is already assembled, and quite honestly, freeze plugs will more than do the job in this particular scenario so I think I am just going that route when I take the block/head in to be blueprinted.
So with yours bolted up, minus that one hole, you had a total of four bolts connecting the block to trans correct?
Yeah, that sounds right. Just the one bolt was left out.
I saw you asked how my performance mods were working out on the 2.4, specifically the cams, and I honestly can't provide any good feedback on them yet. I installed the long block with stock accessories to break it in. Almost everything is stock, even the plastic blow off valve lol. I do have some things installed like a Fluidyne, Wb02, ECMLink, etc. I'm doing a tranny cooler tomorrow and STM fuel line kits next weekend. Even though it's no fun, I probably won't put a FP3065 on until after the fuel system, FMIC, exhaust, and basic tranny mods are done and working perfectly before hand. I just got a fat raise today so I'm hoping to have this thing complete and on the dyno spinning 600whp+ by fall. We'll see!!
The reason I said stroker pistons is because I read in this thread that people are using storker pistons.
In a 4G64, 4G63 Stroker Pistons are only used when using 156mm rods.
The stroker pistons also have to be 86.5mm or larger in diameter since the stock bore of a 4G64 is 86.5mm.
In a 4G63 2.3L Stroker using a 4G64 crank, you have to use Stroker Pistons.
These stroker pistons have their wrist pins moved up 6mm to accommodate half of the 12mm extra stroke of the 100mm crank.
Because several people are messaging me asking how far I am into my build I'll just state here. My build is currently on hold. My funds have gone to shit, I now have custody of my daughter, my wife is a full time student and works PRN (as needed) at her place of employment, and my pay is based on the cost of Gas, and right now it's gone down a lot... My rent has gone up and parts are expensive. Currently I have...
2.4L block, tanked, bored, prepared for my pistons.
87mm Wiseco Pistons.
eagle 2.4L crank
eagle H-beam rods
SBR Stage 6 (race port) 4g63 head, Manley oversize valves, Manley springs/retainers.
Crower 280 cams, Revised lifters.
Custom made (jmf clone of course) SMIM.
80mm throttle body
Holset HX50 in pieces at the moment.
Bosch 1400cc flow matched injectors, dunno if they will work or not, might sell.
MegaSquirt, wiring harness.
I still need to get a manual AWD transmission (shep??), engine gasket kit, timing gears, belts, BSEK, FMIC/piping (sold other one)... fuel pump, FPR, new rail (selling one I have to buddy)... just a few things here and there.
This site is FILLED with information. I recommend that anytime you have a question, you try and search to see if it has already been discussed. You will find a lot of information and will get it quicker than waiting for someone to respond.
If I'm not mistaken that link was posted in this thread once before. There are several links to build blogs of the same setup. Thank you though for the post.
.
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? 
You're laughable at best dude, find a new hobby. Maybe complete that engineering degree you're e-faking.
