Motor is currently being built, Need some quick help

JOEY A · 08-15-2006, 06:40 PM

Ok so my motor is currntly in the shop, its getting a standerd forged build. Weisco's with eagle rods, compression is 9:1....I was wondering can i put in a 2.4 crank? I know its late in the build now but wouldnt that make the car a long rod? Or just stick with the 2.0 since im this far.

I was under the impression a 2.4 crank in a 2.0 would net a 2.3? Or I have it the other way around, thanks guys.

Strokers arent my thing, im really into the 2.0s never really looked into stroker setups.

92awddsm · 08-15-2006, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JOEY A

Ok so my motor is currntly in the shop, its getting a standerd forged build. Weisco's with eagle rods, compression is 9:1....I was wondering can i put in a 2.4 crank? I know its late in the build now but wouldnt that make the car a long rod? Or just stick with the 2.0 since im this far.

I was under the impression a 2.4 crank in a 2.0 would net a 2.3? Or I have it the other way around, thanks guys.

Strokers arent my thing, im really into the 2.0s never really looked into stroker setups.

First off, no, it wouldnt make a long rod. It would be a standard length rod with a 2.4 crank.

You could go with a stroker crank but you would have to get a set of pistons designed to be used with the 2.4 crank. If you use the 2.0 pistons and a 2.4 crank, the pistons would stick out of the top of the block.

pm me if you want to trade the 2.0 wisecos for a set of 2.3 wisecos.

JOEY A · 08-15-2006, 07:56 PM

Ok yeah, I kidna got confused thanks

I mixed up a 2.1 with a 2.3 and whatever blah blah to many things boucing around in my head.

fourreGsixty3 · 08-17-2006, 10:53 AM

What you need to make it a 2.3L strocker engine is a 4g64 crank, stock 6-bolt length rods, and stroker pistons. http://www.slowboyracing.com/shop.php?sid=&cat=2553, just click on which stage you will want, and it explains a lot of stuff about them in there.

Dustin

98evoIIIpwr · 08-17-2006, 11:08 AM

Why dont you just stick with the 2.0 litre? That motor is way capable ... just ask Shep. Besides w/ a built head on a 2.0 you can rev the hell out of it.

fourreGsixty3 · 08-22-2006, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 98evoIIIpwr

Why dont you just stick with the 2.0 litre? That motor is way capable ... just ask Shep. Besides w/ a built head on a 2.0 you can rev the hell out of it.

It all depends on what he wants out of the engine, if he wants more low end power, then he should go with the torquey stroker engine set-up, if he wants a more rev happy drag engine then the 2.0L. there isnt any question of its capabilities...either of them, but they are just 2 different sides of the engine, rev happy(2.0), low end stump pulling power(2.3, 2.4)

Dustin

JOEY A · 09-01-2006, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 98evoIIIpwr

Why dont you just stick with the 2.0 litre? That motor is way capable ... just ask Shep. Besides w/ a built head on a 2.0 you can rev the hell out of it.

Yeah you know its that easy, so easy to build a motor like sheps.

is wrong with DSM people? You cant compare sheps car to any of our street cars, no one knows what the car really is and he will never tell.

Its a 2.0 with a filled block, thats all any of us know about the car

Other than POLK did the head, and we dont even know whats been done to that

Anyways, my motor is done its running WESICOs with 9:1 compresion for more off throttle response and eagle rods.

thanks for the info, in the future im looking to do a 2.3 or 2.4 I like ground pounding TQ!

Precision · 09-01-2006, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JOEY A

I like ground pounding TQ!

You would love a 2.3-2.4 then.

And I dont' know what people's prblem with thinking that you can't rev a 2.3-4 like a 2.0. I have a 2.3 and am not afraid at all to rev it past 10K. It's all about the pistons and rods. Get a set of Crower Billet H-beam rods and some JE Pistons and rev is sky high. A stroker has 3.937 in. stroke and the JE piston is only 281 grams. Piston speed isn't as much as a factor as recipricating wight. I have built many V8 race motors with 4.125 in. stroke and pistons that are well over 450 grams. I recomed that they don't take them past 9K, but for some reason when I walk back into the pits and check the peak RPM it's always in the high 9's. It will work!!

jaredgsx · 09-03-2006, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Precision

You would love a 2.3-2.4 then.

And I dont' know what people's prblem with thinking that you can't rev a 2.3-4 like a 2.0. I have a 2.3 and am not afraid at all to rev it past 10K. It's all about the pistons and rods. Get a set of Crower Billet H-beam rods and some JE Pistons and rev is sky high. A stroker has 3.937 in. stroke and the JE piston is only 281 grams. Piston speed isn't as much as a factor as recipricating wight. I have built many V8 race motors with 4.125 in. stroke and pistons that are well over 450 grams. I recomed that they don't take them past 9K, but for some reason when I walk back into the pits and check the peak RPM it's always in the high 9's. It will work!!

Exactly! A buddy of mine built a 2.3l ( by built I mean he actually took to the time to see what would allow him to rev it high) and he was shifting at 9,700 rpm, everyweekend, at the track. Never had a problem.

98evoIIIpwr · 09-10-2006, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JOEY A

Yeah you know its that easy, so easy to build a motor like sheps.

is wrong with DSM people? You cant compare sheps car to any of our street cars, no one knows what the car really is and he will never tell.

Its a 2.0 with a filled block, thats all any of us know about the car

Other than POLK did the head, and we dont even know whats been done to that

Well we know it's a 2.0 litre dont we. If you ask for input dont bash someone when they give it to you. Didnt your mother teach you manners?

Also, it's not hard to build a motor like sheps. It's not that any of us dont have the capabilities, its that we dont have the time/money to do it.

Now, lets compare IQ's since I have problems.

fourreGsixty3 · 09-11-2006, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaredgsx

Exactly! A buddy of mine built a 2.3l ( by built I mean he actually took to the time to see what would allow him to rev it high) and he was shifting at 9,700 rpm, everyweekend, at the track. Never had a problem.

Im not calling your buddy's knowledge into account, but how bout pulling the head and checking the cyl. walls for wear.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Precision

And I dont' know what people's prblem with thinking that you can't rev a 2.3-4 like a 2.0. I have a 2.3 and am not afraid at all to rev it past 10K. It's all about the pistons and rods. Get a set of Crower Billet H-beam rods and some JE Pistons and rev is sky high. A stroker has 3.937 in. stroke and the JE piston is only 281 grams. Piston speed isn't as much as a factor as recipricating wight. I have built many V8 race motors with 4.125 in. stroke and pistons that are well over 450 grams. I recomed that they don't take them past 9K, but for some reason when I walk back into the pits and check the peak RPM it's always in the high 9's. It will work!!

Ok well you dont have to be affraid to rev it past 10k, but since the less then desirable rod ratio its not a good idea. Piston speed isnt the reason people dont rev strokers past stock rev limiter, its because they dont want egg shaped wear on their cyl. walls. The rod ratio at high rpm's puts excesive force on the cyl walls a waers them in an egg shape, that is why shep and rau have 2.0s they dont want to replace the block every couple races from wearing the cyl walls like this. with a little research you could have known this, but my advice is to pull the head and check for this uneven wear on the cyl. walls. I dont have a stroker but I have done my research on this venture since this is the route I am going, and I have researched for nearly a year on this subject, and talked with people who have them, and talked with the likes of Darren from FFWD on this subject. Just though I would give you some insite into this.

Dustin

Precision · 09-28-2006, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fourreGsixty3

Im not calling your buddy's knowledge into account, but how bout pulling the head and checking the cyl. walls for wear.

Ok well you dont have to be affraid to rev it past 10k, but since the less then desirable rod ratio its not a good idea. Piston speed isnt the reason people dont rev strokers past stock rev limiter, its because they dont want egg shaped wear on their cyl. walls. The rod ratio at high rpm's puts excesive force on the cyl walls a waers them in an egg shape, that is why shep and rau have 2.0s they dont want to replace the block every couple races from wearing the cyl walls like this. with a little research you could have known this, but my advice is to pull the head and check for this uneven wear on the cyl. walls. I dont have a stroker but I have done my research on this venture since this is the route I am going, and I have researched for nearly a year on this subject, and talked with people who have them, and talked with the likes of Darren from FFWD on this subject. Just though I would give you some insite into this.

Dustin

10 sets of pistons will wear out far faster than the block will. The 4g63 has so much nickle in them that they don't really wear much at all. I have rebuilt many motors that have more than 170K on them and there is no ring ridge, and you can still see the cross-hatching from the riged hone. Belive what you've heard, I will teach what I know and is tried and true.

canucatchdis · 02-20-2007, 09:59 PM

Not to hijack but....
I have Scat rods and Weisco pistons and of course a 2.4 crank. Precision, you were talking about rotating weight, would my setup be worthy of that high of rpms (9,000)? Also what valvetrain are you running? We dont want valve float now do we?

I have crower valve springs and the titanium retainers.

Thanks

JacksonAuto · 02-23-2007, 09:07 AM

If it's built right you don't need to run it to 10k. Our customers with 2.3L's rarely spin them past 7600. Why is everyone so fascinated with twisting the hell out of their motors? If you can make more power, run faster and be more reliable at a lower RPM then why not? And after 170k miles you may still see the cross hatch but that doesn't mean there's no wear.

norice4me · 02-27-2007, 01:59 AM

hey i got a 2.3 and i rev the shit out of it and it pulls all gear im very happy on what i got from ffwd they did a good job but my tranny and clutch went at the same time ahhhhhhhhhhh lol go with what you want to go with

mygsx2120 · 07-07-2007, 07:24 PM

Quote:

If you can make more power, run faster and be more reliable at a lower RPM then why not?

+1

Unless your turbo is ginormous there is no need to rev above 8k. Even with something as big as a FP3065, it will start to fall off after 8,000rpms on a stroker. I don't know why everyone builds a stroker for low end power and then want to rev the piss out of them. If they make the power down low, keep the revs down low. Unless you are building your car for some other reason then to go fast. If you just want to rev high, buy a honda with vtech. Just joking.