2.3lr or 2.1 which to build.....

[farley13]

Well my shell should be here next week (2g eclipse) .
I am going to put in my 2g auto driveline in it gut it cage etc....

I am leaning towards the 2.3lr for the tq.... I just haven't found a solid awnser on if I should be striving for peak tq or with the auto I can sacrifice tq for higher hp number? I have done alot of reading. But I just can't seem to find a direct awnser of what has been working for other people

Also I really haven't found a rpm limit for where the faster guys are revving out there autos....

I plan on street driving it on pump just to drive it, but primarily will be on e85.
And I will buy supporting mods as needed and will. Be ran with a water to air intorcooler and as short of charge pipes as I can fab up.


Thanks for the info or possible links I missed in advance.

 

[92AWDHX40]

A direct answer why not run the 2.3 if you can. So many factors to look at not just the engine.

 

[farley13]

Well I am planning on running the 2.3lr setup... It's good for high rpm and obvious displacement benefit .... My thinking was the extra longevity of the 2.1 at sustained rpm usage ......

I have both blocks and cranks at my disposal it's just which one will be better for an auto 2g street/strip car

 

[BoostforBreakfast]

I'd personally go 2.1 if I was to go all out. Shorter stoke = less piston speed per rpm, less chance of piston-to-bore interaction, less rod side load, less direct bearing load as well... gotta match cams/port work to it as well.

 

[farley13]

Yea I see the benefits of the 2.1 for sure.... Than I see people doing very well with 2.3lr or a BR 2.3rpm setup

 

[BoostforBreakfast]

either is good when built right, but I think with the less stress/friction created by the 2.1, that it would be a better choice for longevity.... my two and a half cents

 

[farley13]

Alright thank you!

Like I Said it will see light street duty mostly to and from the track and occasionally drive
It to work (then go straight to the track) andante drive or to a meet or two but that really what I have the colt for .

 

[mitsubishimanic]

check this link out i has every thing you need to know about the diffrent stroker kits . id personaly go with a 2.1 destroker


http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/art...stroker-destroker-long-rod-engine-basics.html

 

[clipto]

2.2 is where it's at.

 

[farley13]

I read the main part of that thread. But I haven't found anything awd auto spicific

 

[mitsubishimanic]

i dont quite understand what u mean awd auto specific. i have an awd auto so im definetly interested in what u mean.

 

[farley13]

Well just to clarify ..... With a manual u can help the car launch so to speak and build boost.... Heavy or higher 2 step.. The tune with a 2 step.. Nursing the clutch ... Etc...

An auto is limited by stall and what boost can be made with that converter.. The clutch packs.. The way the trans is set up and so fourth... So I am trying to figure out weather the more tq from a bigger motor will bandaid the auto problems with building boost at the line... Along with what are guys revvi

 

[mitsubishimanic]

oh i see well ive always heard more torque is better to help get off the line since so much power is lost with an auto because of the extra rotational mass. from what i read matching up your cams turbo and a torque converter will help you off the line better then increasing displacement. but do all that and increase displacement would be even better. just a thought.

 

[91stocker]

I've always leaned towards the 2.3 but recently the 2.4 has had my interest. Just to throw another option in the mix

 

[farley13]

Well the original idea was put the 2.1lr into my colt and be a highway demon.... And use the crank from the 2.4 in a 4g63 and make a 2.3lr and make it a drag monster .....

 

[BoostforBreakfast]

...problem solved

 

[farley13]

right but what ever engine ends up in the colt idc ..... i am more preferably putting the better drag setup into the awd auto... the choice is should i go for the rpm capable 2.1 so i am not worried about streching the rpm on the 2.3?

or will the 2g auto trans not be to wound up with the proper sized slicks on it using a 2.3 lr?


i know this discussion really doesnt seem like its going anywhere, and i am sorry if this question is "noob" ish... but the 2g auto is a new monster to me, if i was building a manual car i would have just built the 2.1lr and tossed it in there can called it a day and revved it to the moon with a typical big turbo.

 

[viperlp01]

What the hell is a 2.3LR? your gonna try to fit a 156mm rod with a 100mm stroke in a 63 block? The auto needs the RPM if you plan on going any faster than a 10 sec pass. You will burn up your OD clutches trying to not rev it out and shifting into 4th. The standard ole 2.0L 150mm rod with 88mm stroke, or the 2.2L are the best options.

 

[farley13]

What the hell is a 2.3LR? your gonna try to fit a 156mm rod with a 100mm stroke in a 63 block? The auto needs the RPM if you plan on going any faster than a 10 sec pass. You will burn up your OD clutches trying to not rev it out and shifting into 4th. The standard ole 2.0L 150mm rod with 88mm stroke, or the 2.2L are the best options.

sorry you are correct i kept adding lr on to the 2.3 by accident my mistake!


i have been looking for the last week or so on finding a thread on where people discuss the rpm they are hitting with there autos and i havent been able to find it.

if thats the case i can always throw together a 2.0 no worries there. but i jsut wanted to check out my other options before i dive into it.


thanks for the info though!

 

[camfast]

Why dont you look at building a 2.4LR, this would probably be best to stall up on a stock or aftermarket converter plus you could rev it up.

 

[boost97gst]

Why not a 64 block with 63 head? Thats nice and simple and gives you gobs of torque.

 

[farley13]

Yea the 2.4lr honestly sounds like the best option. I never looked into it assuming the Ross and piston cost would be astronomical . But the prices aren't bad at all so I am probibly going to go with that and just build another refreshed 2.0 for my colt.


Thanks guys!


Oh can anyone point me to a thread, maybe a build thread where they discuss the rpm limits or problems with revving an auto into some high rpms? Or is this one of those I get what I pay for and have to just send my stuff out to get done?

 

[killercolt]

If you don't want to wait 6-8 weeks for a set of 2.2l destroke piston from Wiseco, I got a set I am selling. I am going to build a 5.3l V8 for my Mustang I stead of a 4g. You will need a 94mm crank, 2.4l block, and 150mm rods. You can combine it with a 156mm rods, 2.4l block and 88mm crank to get a destroke 2.1l.

2.4l is a better build imo

 

[n0de]

Well im sort of confused as to what you really want more. You talk about caging and stripping the car, id go with a 2.1LR a big a$$ turbo and rev to the moon.

If you plan to drive it on the street a lot (caged and stripped, im assuming not, but you never know) then a 2.3

 

[farley13]

well like i said if its being driven on the street its just to cruise around and maybe play around.. but thats mostly what the colt is for.....

yes i plan on gutting and caging it and primarily drive to the strip and back....

my whole initial thread was to debate exactly what you asked node, weather a 2.1lr to rev to the moon was better, or a 2.4lr....in an auto awd 2g....


my thoughts were to do a 2.3 and try and build the best of both worlds but i had forgotten i could do a 2.4lr...which is why i made this thread... i am strictly asking which would be better for a auto 2g... the idea is so do some very light street driving maybe up to 2 hours round trip..but the idea is to make it a drag toy. and see how fast i can get it