hello, I looked around but couldnt find exactly what I was looking for in the forums...
I'm looking to build a 2.4L for my gsx....I bought the car with everything except engine....I want to use a 2.4L out of a 85-87 galant G64B...I've read different things, I dont have much to spend but I'm trying to do it right the first time, I Know I need forged pistons...I will be using arp bolts for the caps and the rods, also for the head...I will be buying new bearings...so here's my questions.

1. Can I go without oil squirters? I've read that with forged pistons I dont need them.

2. Do I need to get aftermarket rods or will the stock ones handle the power?

3. Can someone explain to me or show me pix or what they mean when they say you need to file the piston rings?

4. After putting pistons, do I need anything else or can I just go ahead and swap accessories from a 2.0 to the built engine?

My HP goal is around 350 to 400hp....I know its easy to make a 2.0L get to that HP range but I have heard it puts more strain on a 2.0L than a 2.4L in that HP range.

Pix would be nice if you have them...

Try using a G4CS motor it's a six bolt block that is a 2.4 it's out of a 89-91 Hyundai Sonata. You can find them at junk yards really cheap I picked up a complete one for 150. You can use all the acessories from your 4G63. It is basicly the same motor it doesn't have oil squirters either but you can go without them if you chose or have a machine shop tap your block for them. Weisco makes the pistons for them in standard size or .020 over. The rods are the same as a 1g so they could handle the 350HP your looking for. You just need the 4G63 head and timing components but everything will bolt up just fine. And as for filing piston rings it's just getting the right clearance in the gap in the ring while it is in the cylinder. If you haven't assembled a motor before I would recommend having someone physically walk you through it or have a professional assemble it. You don't want to spend all your money on parts get it together and learn that you messed something up and all that time and money went for nothing. But, Good Luck with the build.

Thnks for the info.
I have assembled engines before but it was on big blocks like chevy 454's...ON those, the kits come ready and all you do it very lightly file the sharp edges that touch the cylinder walls...but I read that on a dsm you need to clearance them by filing them and that's where I got confused...I've looked for G4CS at my slavage yards but cant find any.

What's everyone's guesstimate on the HP running 15-18psi on a 2.4L?
I'm looking to make it a quick car but still street driveable, I know the clutch is the hardest thing to choose because if you choose a 4-6pack one they can break during street use, but then if you use a street clutch, you can fry it quick.

Your HP is obviously going to depend on how modded your going to go but nearing 350HP with a 2.4 and a big 16g isn't unheard of but you'll be close to maxing out the 16g.
As for the clutch I personally am going to go with an ACT 2600 6 puck but my car also isn't my daily driver in fact I'm trying to finish my 2.3 stroker and the car is in pieces but that's the life of a DSMer.

I can get a 20g but I've heard there is alot of lag....I built a 2.3L stroker but I sold it before I installed it...I did alot of research and found out it puts alot of strain on the sides of the pistons and many times, the piston skirts rub against the cylinder wall and I saw the pictures so I decided not to install it since I want to do this the right way once and not have to bother with it til I get my 100k miles

a 2.4 will spool a 20g like nothing. Even on a 2.0 there isn't a great amount of lag on a 20g, but its subjective. Everyone has a different opinion on whats tolerable on turbo lag.

The G4CS is the same block as a 4G63 so if you think that it's going to stress the piston skirts with stroking a 4G63 what would be the difference with the G4CS or any other 2.4 for that matter? The deck is no taller on the G4CS than the 4G63. But a 20g would work great for you I think your going to have less lag because of the increased displacement and higher compression ratio.

talon94eagle said:

The G4CS is the same block as a 4G63 so if you think that it's going to stress the piston skirts with stroking a 4G63 what would be the difference with the G4CS or any other 2.4 for that matter? The deck is no taller on the G4CS than the 4G63. But a 20g would work great for you I think your going to have less lag because of the increased displacement and higher compression ratio.

Click to expand...

WRONG! The G4CS block is 6mm taller than the 4G63 block. And there will be less stress in the 2.4 block becuase of the rod to stroke ratio. Its made to be a 2.4 from the factory.

I stand corrected thanks for the info the only thing that I had ever been told was that the
G4CS just had a larger bore and the longer stroke but that it was cast the exact same as a 4G63. I appoligize for the misinformation and thanks for correcting me.

It does share the same casting but has 6mm on top of the 4G63 block. Everything still bolts up to the G4CS block as it would with the 4G63 block.

Standard builds of 2.4L/2.3L motors both use 100mm stroke cranks and 150mm length rods. The rod to stroke ratio is the same for either.

The only difference I can think of between the two is short vs tall pistons. I beleive short pistons have been argued to have superior wear characteristics (at least ones built these days, maybe not 15 years ago), in addition to being a great deal lighter, which is important on the long stroke (high piston speed) motors.

The standard 2.4L having the tall pistons, the standard 2.3L having the short pistons.

So it its just a longer piston. it is more stable in the cylinder and that's why the 2.4 piston skirts dont rub on the cylinder wall right?

90gst said:

My HP goal is around 350 to 400hp....I know its easy to make a 2.0L get to that HP range but I have heard it puts more strain on a 2.0L than a 2.4L in that HP range.

Click to expand...

What "strain"? I think the hp record for a stock internaled 2.0L is around the 560 - 570hp range nowadays (using meth I believe) . You can easily get that number on a stock internaled 2.0L using an Evo III B-16G or 20G with no form of injection. Don't even bother with a stroked 4G63 or 2.4L if your hp goal isn't at least 500hp.

The only strain you'd be putting is a crappy tune, lack of supporting mods, or when you actually do get around to maxing out stuff hp range wise (manifolds, internals, stock cams, ect...). However, nothing gets maxed out on a stock internaled 4G63 at your power goal.

90gst said:

So it its just a longer piston. it is more stable in the cylinder and that's why the 2.4 piston skirts dont rub on the cylinder wall right?

Click to expand...

I don't beleive there is any conclusive evidence that either wears significantly less. Built motors of various piston brands of differing generations of piston design, and differing clearances and skill of assembly, oil used when running amongst other things make it hard to say.

Something to think about though, a short piston has less material to cause friction, and moving the pin higher and closer to the pistons center of gravity is said to make it more stable.

sunflashx said:

Something to think about though, a short piston has less material to cause friction, and moving the pin higher and closer to the pistons center of gravity is said to make it more stable.

Click to expand...

The only thing i dont like about that idea is that it pushes the piston pin up into the oil ring land. Which would make pushing oil threw the oil ring alot easier.

I know the ford 347 stroker kit was known as a oil burner for this exact reason. They then fixed it and make a different piston for that 347 kit. The new pistons dont have the wrist pin up in the oil ring land.

To each their own.

My 2.4L long rod pistons, which are pretty much a oversized 2.3L piston, would burn oil at an idle without the PCV valve hooked up.

Haven't had a problem with them since I hooked that back up.

sunflashx said:

My 2.4L long rod pistons, which are pretty much a oversized 2.3L piston, would burn oil at an idle without the PCV valve hooked up.

Haven't had a problem with them since I hooked that back up.

Click to expand...

Still burned oil huh. Man all this is making my decision so hard. 2.4 or 2.0

To be clear on that, the car no longer burns oil as long as the PCV valve is hooked up. Without the PCV valve it creates a very obvious amount of smoking when idling, and as far as I can tell, only at an idle.

Just finishing up my own 2.4 setup. I went high end top of the line stuff.I don't think oil squirters are need with forged pistons and you have to change out pistons anyway to bring the compression down.
I am going to be running a HD4000 clutch setup. See how that works out.

To the previous post that was concerning spool time:

I get full boost around 3k rpms with a 50 trim. It would spool closer to 3.7k with the 2 point slow... Ive also had a 20g (tdo5h) and I that also spooled in the 3.5k range on the 4g63. Even though the bigger turbos dont make "boost" in lower rpms, they flow as much if not more air (that was my experience with the 20g and 50 trim anyways).

The extra torque makes it way more fun to drive. There is a little more vibration (no BS's) but not bad at all. The gas mileage was hurt because the car is on boost more often. Im happy with the swap.

I understand the extra torque fun factor, but using a turbo that size on something with that much displacement won't be that fun in the higher RPM's, even with a good cam combo. I know people who have used a 20G and a 50 trim on a 2.3L/2.4L setup. Both spooled quick, and pooped out up top (even with HKS 272's).

IMO, you need something that flows 60lb/min+ to take true power advantage of a 2.3L/2.4L.

what about the turbos...is it better to get a 50-60 trim than a mitsubishi made one? everyone knows mitsubishi made ones are good at doing their job but 16g and bigger often need rebuilds after 5k miles and the others can go 20-50k

Dieselboy said:

I understand the extra torque fun factor, but using a turbo that size on something with that much displacement won't be that fun in the higher RPM's, even with a good cam combo. I know people who have used a 20G and a 50 trim on a 2.3L/2.4L setup. Both spooled quick, and pooped out up top (even with HKS 272's).

IMO, you need something that flows 60lb/min+ to take true power advantage of a 2.3L/2.4L.

Click to expand...

I agree entirely.

I shift at 6.5k now. It still make way more power through the rpms, I just dont have to rev the hell out of the motor to make that power. That was one of my objectives when making this swap. The swap shifted the power band up (more power) and to the left (lower rpms). Im not trying to break any drag records out there, hell I dont even drag race. But the car is FUN AS HELL. I read to many post where people want to build 2.3/2.4 motors and want it to rev to 9k. WHY? Get it dynoed, figure out where the power band is, and choose shift points based on your dyno graph.

If you want 450+ hp, you will definately need something larger then a 50 trim. Also, if you graph out a 50 trim on a compressor map with 2.4 displacement, you will see that the "pump king" drops off in efficiency rather quickly. Either way, I love my setup and wont be changing anything.

^^ Good point. Most people do 2.3L/2.4L setups to put down major power and to spool large turbos that 2.0L's can only dream of doing on the street. But it's true, not everyone may want that.

well I'm trying to keep it as a daily driver...just a built daily driver....I go out racing in the summer at night time, Im not looking to make me a 10 sec car but something respectable like low 13's or possibly high 12's....
You guys think that with the built 2.4L, supporting fuel mods, and a 20g I'll be around the 12/13 sec mark??? I know there's lots I can do to get upwards of 500hp but then you really cant have it as a daily driver...


Also, everyone's comments make me ask another question....The 2.0L with a 20G is great at higher rpms, but sucks at the lower rpms. Now the 2.4L with a 20g will suck at higher rpms but is great at lower end torque....So wouldnt both setups even out? Suppose you race the 2.0 and 2.4 with the 20g...the 2.4 will pull off the line quicker because of the torque, but then the 2.0 will catch up at higher rpms????