Anyone have any experience with the 2.2L

[xxShaneOmac]

I came accross some information about a 4G63 2.2L stoker.

Has anyone had any kind of dealings with these?

[DoyoFCT]

well its a nice idea, but the only person who sells off the shelf 2.2 build parts is magnus.

It's not cheap.... or The way I thought about doing it was 94mm eagle crank, offset pin pistons and 159mm custom made rods. In a 2.4/G4cs block.

I tossed the idea out when I dug around for the cost of rods. When manley already makes an off the shelf 162mm rod for the 2.1 destroker. If you have the cash go for it, but for the money the 2.1 which has an even better rod ratio is much easier to do.

[xxShaneOmac]

The way I herd about it seemed super easy.

Stock OEM Crank
156mm Rods
.030 Stoker Pistions.

Does this not work out to ~2.18L

[delta448]

If it's a 4G63 block 0.030" over is 85.75mm bore, and you get 2032cc mathematically.
If it's a 2.4L block, 0.030" over is 87.25mm bore and you get 2104cc mathematically.

Read posts 488-510 on the 4th Holset thread.

[xxShaneOmac]

So theres alot of back and forth in that post.

But nothing really clears up if that combo would or would'nt be ~2.18L with OEM Crank.

[delta448]

Using a 88mm OEM 2L crank, it would be impossible to bore either the 2L or 2.4L blocks enough to achieve 2.18L, you must use a bigger stroke. The practical limit in bore size is 88mm, or 0.060" overbore for a 2.4L(very risky and usually only done on 2.4L blocks).

The formula for displacement is 3.1415 * (bore/2)^2 * stroke * number of cylinders.
(Rod ratio is simply rod length divided by crank stroke.)


Using an 88mm (stock 2.0L) crankshaft:

85mm bore = 1997cc
85.5mm bore = 2021
86mm bore = 2045
86.5mm bore = 2068
87mm bore = 2092
87.5mm bore = 2116
88mm bore = 2141

Rod Ratios:
All are off the shelf parts

stock piston and 150mm rod = 1.70

stroker piston and 156mm rod = 1.77

stroker piston, 2.4 block, 162mm rod = 1.84

For a 92mm Magnus crankshaft:

85mm bore = 2088cc
85.5mm bore = 2113
86mm bore = 2138
86.5mm bore = 2163
87mm bore = 2188
87.5mm bore = 2213
88mm bore = 2238

Rod Ratios:

Custom Rod Length

stock piston, 148mm rod = 1.61

stroker piston, 154mm rod = 1.67

stroker piston, 2.4 block, 160mm rod = 1.74

Custom Piston Compression Height

150mm rod, 33mm CH piston, 2L block = 1.63

150mm rod, 39mm CH piston, 2.4L block = 1.63

156mm rod, 27mm CH piston, 2L block = 1.69

156mm rod, 33mm CH piston, 2.4L block = 1.69

162mm rod, 27mm CH piston, 2.4L block = 1.76

For a 93mm 4D68 crankshaft:

85mm bore = 2110cc
85.5mm bore = 2135
86mm bore = 2160
86.5mm bore = 2186
87mm bore = 2211
87.5mm bore = 2236
88mm bore = 2262

Rod Ratios:

Custom Rod Length

stock piston, 147.5mm rod = 1.586

stroker piston, 153.5mm rod = 1.650

stroker piston, 2.4 block, 159.5mm rod = 1.715

Custom Piston Compression Height

150mm rod, 32.5mm CH piston, 2L block = 1.61

150mm rod, 38.5mm CH piston, 2.4L block = 1.61

156mm rod, 26.5mm CH piston, 2L block = 1.67

156mm rod, 32.5mm CH piston, 2.4L block = 1.67

162mm rod, 26.5mm CH piston, 2.4L block = 1.74

For a 94mm Eagle crankshaft:

85mm bore = 2134cc
85.5mm bore = 2159
86mm bore = 2184
86.5mm bore = 2209
87mm bore = 2235
87.5mm bore = 2261
88mm bore = 2287

Rod Ratios:

Custom Rod Length

stock piston, 147mm rod = 1.56

stroker piston, 153mm rod = 1.63

stroker piston, 2.4 block, 159mm rod = 1.69

Custom Piston Compression Height

150mm rod, 32mm CH piston, 2L block = 1.59

150mm rod, 38mm CH piston, 2.4L block = 1.59

156mm rod, 26mm CH piston, 2L block = 1.659

156mm rod, 32mm CH piston, 2.4L block = 1.659

162mm rod, 26mm CH piston, 2.4L block = 1.72

For a 97mm Crower crankshaft:

85mm bore = 2202cc
85.5mm bore = 2228
86mm bore = 2254
86.5mm bore = 2280
87mm bore = 2306
87.5mm bore = 2333
88mm bore = 2360

Rod Ratios:

Custom Rod Length

stock piston, 145.5mm rod = 1.5

stroker piston, 151.5mm rod = 1.56

stroker piston, 2.4 block, 157.5mm rod = 1.62

Custom Piston Compression Height

150mm rod, 30.5mm CH piston, 2L block = 1.54

150mm rod, 36.5mm CH piston, 2.4L block = 1.54

156mm rod, 24.5mm CH piston, 2L block = 1.60

156mm rod, 30.5mm CH piston, 2.4L block = 1.60

162mm rod, 24.5mm CH piston, 2.4L block = 1.67

For a 100mm (stock 2.4L) crankshaft:

85mm bore = 2270cc
85.5mm bore = 2296
86mm bore = 2323
86.5mm bore = 2350
87mm bore = 2378
87.5mm bore = 2405
88mm bore = 2433

Rod Ratios:

stock pistons, 144mm rod = 1.44

stroker pistons, 150mm rod = 1.50

stroker pistons, 2.4 block, 156mm rod = 1.56

For a 102mm Crower crankshaft:

85mm bore = 2315cc
85.5mm bore = 2342
86mm bore = 2370
86.5mm bore = 2397
87mm bore = 2425
87.5mm bore = 2453
88mm bore = 2481

Rod Ratios:

Custom Rod Length

stock piston, 143mm rod = 1.40

stroker piston, 149mm rod = 1.46

stroker piston, 2.4 block, 155mm rod = 1.52

Custom Piston Compression Height

150mm rod, 28mm CH piston, 2.0L block = 1.47

150mm rod, 34mm CH piston, 2.4L block = 1.47

156mm rod, 28mm CH piston, 2.4L block = 1.529

For a 106mm Crower crankshaft:

Crower states the 106mm crank must be used in a 2.4L block, stock 2.4L bore is 86.5mm.

85mm bore = n/a
85.5mm bore = n/a
86mm bore = n/a
86.5mm bore = 2491cc
87mm bore = 2520
87.5mm bore = 2549
88mm bore = 2579

Rod Ratios:

Custom Rod Length

stock piston, 2.4 block, 147mm rod = 1.39

stroker piston, 2.4 block, 153mm rod = 1.44

Custom Piston Compression Height

150mm rod, 32mm CH piston, 2.4L block = 1.41

156mm rod, 26mm CH piston, 2.4L block = 1.47

These are all of the crankshaft stroke lengths I have ever heard of anyone actually using. There are probably some other custom length ones out there (Japanese made), but most of those are pricey and unproven. If I've forgotten any, I'll edit this post as I'm made aware of them.

For reference the 2.4 blocks have a deck height of 235mm and the 2.0 blocks have a deck height of 229mm. The compression heights for the custom pistons I listed are based on zero deck, slightly taller heights can possibly be used if the pistons are carefully designed, a thick head gasket is used and/or a higher compression ratio is desired.

[JamiesTSI]

^^^^^Nice write up.

[xxShaneOmac]

Very nice Delta!

I never knew that displacement deals only with your Crank.

Piston / Rods dont fit into the equation?

[delta448]

Displacement is the volume the piston displaces as it travels up and down in the bore. The length it travels is the crankshaft's stroke regardless of how long the rod is or how tall the piston is. The only other measurement you need to know besides stroke is the diameter of the cylinder bore and you can calculate displacement.

Rod size is used to find rod ratio, where the length of the rod is divided by the length of the stroke. Higher rod ratios are more ideal, especially for high revving engines where a longer rod means the piston transfers less side-loading force (more side-loading force = more friction) onto the cylinder wall. This is one of the major benefits of the 2.1L de-stroker, a longer rod can be used because there is a 6mm taller deck height on 2.4L blocks.

Piston height, the distance from the center of the wrist pin to the top of the crown (on flat-top pistons), mainly affects the final compression ratio. Example: When using a 100mm (2.4L) crank in a 2.0L block to create a 2.3L stroker, to keep the CR the same as on a 2L the piston height must be 6mm shorter to allow the 6mm longer throw in each direction that the new crankshaft provides. So, basically the end solution is to move the piston's wrist pin 6mm closer to the crown, and cut a slight dish in the piston to offset the larger volume being compressed. Which is the only way to keep the original 2L piston design's compression ratio. This is why stroker pistons are lighter but also weaker.

[tstkl]

I believe I've heard some refer to the 2.3 as a 2.2 since, like you said:

For a 100mm (stock 2.4L) crankshaft:
85mm bore = 2270cc

who really cares though, the biggest varience you get from overboring (if your charts are correct) would be 166cc's. Thats barely worth noting. In my opinion, the only major displacement changes worth noting are which crank you use. Sure the bore can change it .166 liters if you have a 102mm crank, but realistically, no one is going to go from 85mm pistons to 88mm pistons, let alone run 88mm pistons in the first place. It comes down to little pointless differences. "I have a 2.253687419... liter motor" is the same to me as someone who says, "I have a 14b, WITH THE 7cm^2 housing." In the end, does it really make that big of a difference? Sure, there will be a difference, and if I have a bunch of turbine housings lying around and Im putting a 14b on a car, I'll pick the 7 over the 6, but Im not going to prance around counting mililiters of displacement.

So to the OP (and really the point of this thread) pick your crank/bore based on the block you have/want to use and the crank you have/want to use, not the 10cc difference it will make. If you want a high reving motor, stick with an 88mm, if you want a low torque motor, go with a 100mm, or if you have different goals, look at the cranks available and decide based on what compromises you want to make.

ps, thanks delta448 for that post

[Slippi84]

I tossed around the idea of going with a 2.2 motor for the displacemnet increase with still having a good rod ratio. I would go with the 94mm eagle crank 162 Groden rods and I wasn't quite sure on which pistons would give me the right setup but after looking at that post that 88 bore pistons

[mach4g63t]

Originally Posted by Slippi84

I tossed around the idea of going with a 2.2 motor for the displacemnet increase with still having a good rod ratio. I would go with the 94mm eagle crank 162 Groden rods and I wasn't quite sure on which pistons would give me the right setup but after looking at that post that 88 bore pistons

I might be wrong, but can you even bore for 88mm pistons in our blocks? 85mm is the stock 2L piston bore. 85.5mm is .02 over... so, 86 is .04, 86.5 is .06 over... and I've heard anyone hardly ever goes more than .06 over 'cause it leaves you with just about no cylinder wall. So, to go to 88mm, would be 1.2mm over? Is that even safe or ideal?

[Slippi84]

Originally Posted by mach4g63t

I might be wrong, but can you even bore for 88mm pistons in our blocks? 85mm is the stock 2L piston bore. 85.5mm is .02 over... so, 86 is .04, 86.5 is .06 over... and I've heard anyone hardly ever goes more than .06 over 'cause it leaves you with just about no cylinder wall. So, to go to 88mm, would be 1.2mm over? Is that even safe or ideal?

No your right but that's why for the setup I was refferring to you have to use a 4g64 block. I was just searching around though anyone know a company that makes 88bore pistons that are coated?

[DoyoFCT]

I tossed around the idea of going with a 2.2 motor for the displacemnet increase with still having a good rod ratio. I would go with the 94mm eagle crank 162 Groden rods and I wasn't quite sure on which pistons would give me the right setup but after looking at that post that 88 bore pistons

to my understanding the only cost effective way to do a 2.2 using a 94mm crank is by using a custom 159mm rod not the 162. This would be with a 2.4 block of course, and if you were to use the 162 rod you would have to move the pin an additional 3mm. I was advised by ross that this might not be a good idea. It can be done, but i didn't like the idea... I think this is probably why magnus developed the 92mm crank to give a little more options.

[DoyoFCT]

I eventually conceded, and settled on building a 2.1 since wiseco and manley make off the shelf solutions.

It's still a work in progress but I will be starting a new thread on the build up soon.

[Slippi84]

Originally Posted by DoyoFCT

to my understanding the only cost effective way to do a 2.2 using a 94mm crank is by using a custom 159mm rod not the 162. This would be with a 2.4 block of course, and if you were to use the 162 rod you would have to move the pin an additional 3mm. I was advised by ross that this might not be a good idea. It can be done, but i didn't like the idea... I think this is probably why magnus developed the 92mm crank to give a little more options.

Yes thanks for the correction the 162 was with a 92 not 94 crank. I think it would be cheaper to do a 94mm with 159mm rod due to the fact that the eagle crank is A LOT cheaper than a magnus billet regular crank and the race cranks make me want to grab my nuts for protection.

[Slippi84]

Still no input on the 2.2 build? Which cams would be better for a 2.2 destroed 2.3 stroker cams or 2.0 cams?

[delta448]

I would say that the 2.3 cams would work better than 2.0 cams for most of us.

My reasoning is purely because 2.3 cams have a more aggressive ramp rate. More duration at medium to peak lift values while retaining similar intake/exhaust overlap and valve events is key when increasing stroke on a turbo car. It's either that or increasing the valve size and doing a lot of tedious porting work.

However, you will not want as much ramp rate if you plan to wind it out to high rpms. At that point I would start looking at 288 duration 2.0L cams, particularly whichever ones have the highest peak lift. Larger valves and passage porting recommended and also I think some adjustable cam gears would become a necessity. The longer stroke would make great use of the extra duration of 288s, but would suffer a sizable loss on the low end (due to the increased overlap) compared to stroker specific cams.

[Slippi84]

I want to run fp3x's but I think fp2x's would probably be better but of course they stopped making them so I would have to get lucky and get a set

[delta448]

I think your choice should be between the 4R, 3X, and 4 depending on what your intentions are for the car. The 4 would probably be my choice if I were building a 2.2L. It still has a nice beefy lobe with only a little less peak lift than the 3X, but beats it in duration all the way up to 0.35" valve lift and doesn't have quite the super aggressive attitude of the 4R. The 3X would be my second choice. I however, am from the school of thought that says to never overcam.

[GST95]

Originally Posted by mach4g63t

I might be wrong, but can you even bore for 88mm pistons in our blocks? 85mm is the stock 2L piston bore. 85.5mm is .02 over... so, 86 is .04, 86.5 is .06 over... and I've heard anyone hardly ever goes more than .06 over 'cause it leaves you with just about no cylinder wall. So, to go to 88mm, would be 1.2mm over? Is that even safe or ideal?

Originally Posted by Slippi84

No your right but that's why for the setup I was refferring to you have to use a 4g64 block. I was just searching around though anyone know a company that makes 88bore pistons that are coated?

All the Mitsu 4g6X blocks are cast the same, for at least the 6 bolts anyways. They are bored and decked to application. Thats why the ID pad doesnt have numbers cast into it. It has a blank pad to write the applicaion on. If you can bore a 2.4L to 88mm, you can bore a 1.6L to 88mm. The advantage you get from the 2.4L block is the extra deck height.