2.4 Dependable?????

[crash27578]

I have read so many threads over this week about the 4g64 and the g4cs builds and I'm still stuck on what might be a better route. I'm either gonna go with 4g63 6bolt or a 98+ 4g64. Just bought a bone stock 96 Tsi with a rod hangin out the side so I'm starting from scratch here. Lookin to make around 350whp that might see the drag strip 2-3 times a year just for fun. Something that I can drive anywhere without to much worry. Love the torgue I read about the 64 but I know there seems to be balancing issues that I have read that has to be delt with. Not so sure about it though. Looking to have fun with little worries and not break the bank. Also plan on using the 2g head with some porting. Anybody shead some light on dependability of a 2.4 build? I know it's hard to beat a 63 6bolt.

 

[SBR Joe]

2.4 is very dependable and makes for a great street setup. Quick power and torque and very dependable. Unlike the 2.3 which by stuffing a big stroke crank in the 2.0 block causing alot of un necessary stress points, teh 2,4 is a 2.4. Nothing frankestien about it.

In the EVO world this is our number 1 selling block by far. For a 50-60 trim ish car on the street it would be a super fun setup.

 

[2gGSXEclipse]

Check with SBR's, i just saw they had a stage 2 2.4 block for sale at a great price if you are interested in doing this.

 

[TunaTalon]

2.4 is very dependable and makes for a great street setup. Quick power and torque and very dependable. Unlike the 2.3 which by stuffing a big stroke crank in the 2.0 block causing alot of un necessary stress points, teh 2,4 is a 2.4.

Unless you use “stroker” pistons on the 4G64 with longer rods the stress points are exactly the same as a 2.3L. The stroke is the same, and the rod length is the same causing all piston dynamics to be exactly the same.

The 4G64 has slightly more displacement with the wider bore and the 2.3L has slightly more stable pistons with the pin moved up.

 

[delta448]

I'm with Maurice.

The long rod 2.4 is really the best option IMO for a hard driven street car that sees track duties occaisonally. For my ultimate build, I'd use a 98-99 spyder GS block for the split thrust bearing, a butchered 100mm crank, a set of SBR's ultra lightweight Mahle stroker pinned pistons and a set of custom length aluminum rods. Add a light flywheel and you have a very fun responsive engine that will make much more torque.

Gixxerdrew uses a long rod 2.4 in his FWD.

 

[crash27578]

Sounds great doing the longer rods but I was hoping to stay with the 7 bolt rods with arp rod bolts since I only want 350whp or will that push to much? I know a lot depends on the rest of my set-up but just looking for an idea if they stand a chance. Thinking about a 50trim

 

[delta448]

You can do 350whp on all stock internals.

If that's as high as you're ever going to shoot for, you could save a lot of money and just drop in another 98+ 7 bolt and a 16G.

 

[crash27578]

You can do 350whp on all stock internals.

If that's as high as you're ever going to shoot for, you could save a lot of money and just drop in another 98+ 7 bolt and a 16G.

63 or 64?

 

[delta448]

Stock 2.0L 4G63 and 16G. A few 16G guys have done 400+whp and it'll spool a bit quicker than a 50 trim.

If you do go 2.4, I'll speculate that you probably can still push it that far on stock internals, just remember that the stock 2.4 bottom end will give you a 9:1 compression ratio with a DOHC 63 head if it's a block that was originally mated to a 16 valve head. The blocks originally mated to 8 valve heads will give a much higher and pump gas unfriendly compression ratio of around 12:1 if you mate them to a DOHC head. I'm not 100% sure, but the ringlands also may not be as strong on stock 2.4 pistons since they were designed for efficiency and not originally meant to withstand the high cylinder pressures of boost. So no matter which block you get, even if you're at 9:1, remember that you're going to need to have tuning capability to adjust the ignition timing down due to the increased CR if you see knock, which you probably will on a stock timing map. Start out slowly when adding more boost too.

If you do go with a stock bottom end 2.4 block, I'd absolutely love to hear how it works out. Be sure to let us know what you decide.

 

[crash27578]

My original idea when reading about the 2.4 was 64 block and crank with 63 7bolt rods and hadn't decided on pistons just yet. Ecmlink and all the fuel mods I needed cause we all know we can run huge injectors with it. Ported 2g head and to keep it looking stock either a 1 or 2g intake manifold with maybe an evo3 exhaust manifold and turbo. Of course custom intercooler piping with front mount and exhaust. Thought 2.4 might be the way but I may just wanna freshin up a 63 7bolt. 98 or 99 that is. Only thing I was thinking to was I know I could pick up a 64 for close to nothing. Got a lot of debating still to do on this. Really like the 64 idea but just might not be what I'm looking for. At least not at the moment.

 

[SOADweskey]

Just throwing this out since it is along the lines of what you are talking about. This is my stroked 6-bolt 2.3l with a 2G head and a 50trim on an FP manifold. I am just now at 500 miles on the engine so turning up the boost and some street tuning will happen this weekend.
There are extra stress concentrations with the 2.3 but I'm not looking for anything over 500 out of this engine so I have confidence that it will be fine.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

 

[SBR Joe]

Unless you use "stroker" pistons on the 4G64 with longer rods the stress points are exactly the same as a 2.3L. The stroke is the same, and the rod length is the same causing all piston dynamics to be exactly the same.

The 4G64 has slightly more displacement with the wider bore and the 2.3L has slightly more stable pistons with the pin moved up.

Not entirely true.

You have a taller deck height in the block. No where near as much rod angle in the 2.4 as the 2.3.

The actual rod ratio may not change using the same stroke crank and rod length, but the 2.3 has a lot sharper angle of the rods when the crank is on its way up, and thats where its more strenuous. Thats what i was referring too.

 

[dsmfa9nutter]

People usually go with the larger displacement because they have a huge turbo and it really helps with spool time. You can do 350 with a 16g and a 2.0 but can EASILY hit your 400 mark with a 20g and the stock 2L.

 

[crash27578]

It's so funny cause several years back I never remembered anybody even daring to suggest using a 7. Two years gone and I missed alot it seems like..... My main goal is reliability and second is cost and third how much power. Is the three piece thrust bearing in the 98-99 really not prone to walk?

 

[beating4g63s]

The 2.4l dohc build is from the looks of it is being the motor of 2010. if your looking for reliability, cost, power this is one of the best setups I'd suggest, the blocks are cheap still, and can easily make your power goals with the correct setup and tune, it's perfect for the streets and strip. the 2.4l is also the same exact motor I'm planning on building currently, which will be my new daily....

 

[crash27578]

Well 6bolts are getting more rare every day so
i would say thats a good reason why. Thinkin hard about the one at slowboy. Just gotta see how things work out.

 

[delta448]

Is the three piece thrust bearing in the 98-99 really not prone to walk?

This thrust bearing design was used on all the 98+ 4G63 and 64 engines that I've seen either in person or in picture, including non-mitsu vehicles with the 64, 3G eclipses, and all Evo 8s and 9s.

There is always a possibility that a mass production engine block will develop excessive crankshaft endplay, its just not constrainable to eliminate the chance with engineering. But, I think whatever revisions were in fact done, if just the 3 piece bearing or if there's something else not easily seen, whatever it was... -it worked.

 

[crash27578]

Ok I think I found a couple of the galant 94 motors for really cheap. Don't know there condition just yet but for the price I'm thinkin of getting one and honing it with new berings and rings just the hell of it and see just what it will do. I have another vehicle so forget. Reliability for now.

 

[dsm-onster]

Not entirely true.

You have a taller deck height in the block. No where near as much rod angle in the 2.4 as the 2.3.

The actual rod ratio may not change using the same stroke crank and rod length, but the 2.3 has a lot sharper angle of the rods when the crank is on its way up, and thats where its more strenuous. Thats what i was referring too.

Isn't the rod angle the same between the 2.3 and the 2.4. The difference in deck height is madup for by the difference in wrist pin height. Which moves the pistons crown up, NOT lengthening the rod. The rod angle is wholey and completelt dependedn on the rod lenght and stroke. The 2.3 and 2.4 have the same of both. The advangate of the 2.3 is that it has as smaller bore which lightens the piston and a piston crown that is closer to the wrist pin, wich also lightens the piston. Dropping piston weight on and otherwise identical rod length and stroke length motor releives some of hte tensile stress on the rod bolts increasing the life of the bearings. Thus the only difference between teh 2.3 and 2.4 is the weight of the piston and the .1 difference because of the bore and that means the 2.3 puts less stress on the rods and hense is more reliable. The 2.3 pistons are even more stable in the bore with less side load being applied as it presents a less lever to th buring charge mixture (wrist pin is closer the piston crown).

. . . I just don't see where you think the standard rod/stroke 2.4 has a better rod angle. Or presents any other longevity advantage.

OP the 2.3 or 2.4 is more streetable than the 2.0 for several reasons. It spools the turbo faster. But more importantly you can see more power at much lower boost. This is where your fuel choice comes into play and personally a major facet of streetability. You could make 400whp with a 20g or 50trim with a 2.3 block at 20psi, but you'll need 25+ psi with a 2.0L block. The increase in heat of the aircharge compressing 5 more psi CAN mean the difference of running pumpgas or race gas. Unless you plan on going to ethanol or water/meth injection.

The drawback is that you need to build the 2.4 motor (pistons are too weak in stock form). Or pay for the stroker parts to make the 2.0 into a 2.3L. AND you CAN do this with a 20g or 50trim with a good tune using a 2.0L motor. If this were a 500whp build I'd say go for the 2.3 or built 2.4, if you want to run pump gas. But at 400whp, you're at the threshold of still being able to get that power out of pump gas with good cam selection and good tuning, and a good turbo choice.

 

[TunaTalon]

Right you are Matt.

Between a stock block 4G64 and a 2.3L stroker:

The strokes are the same.
The rod lengths are the same.
The rod ratios are the same.
The rod angles at any given crank angle are the same.
The average piston velocities are the same.
The peak piston velocities are the same.
The piston accelerations are the same.
The side wall loadings are the same.
The conversions from piston pressure to torque are the same.

The higher deck of the 4G64 does "allow" longer rods if the pin is moved up on the piston, but with stock pistons the 4G64 has exactly, precisely the same piston dynamics as the 2.3L 4G63.

 

[DSM-sagacious]

With your modest goals i think the best/most cost effective setup would be: 4g64 from a 98-99 galant. forged pistons (ild go with the higher compression 9:1 for better responce), and the 2g head you mentioned. A 16g or 20g will do the trick, however ild recommend the bigger of the two. The extra displacement spools the turbo about 500rpm faster. My 64 spooled my stock turbo at about 2k. Also, you can use the 63 cam gear remarked and the stock ecu( until you decide to turn up the boost a good bit) and idle/drive like stock. Remember your oil pressure will be high due to the lack of oil squirters and if you do a balance shaft removal. Be sure to port your oil filter housing and buy a restrictor. Too much oil pressure will a. blow the seals or b. force the turbo shaft into the bearing. Speaking from experience. Lots of fun to drive. Definite difference over the 2.0

 

[crash27578]

I know I have more of a chance for walk on a 94 but its cheap and I believe they have 3 there to choose from out of 94's. What do u mean by stock ecu? I have 96 Tsi and plan on eprom and link being one of my first mods. My whole idea behind this is I can get it running and slowly add my mods I need and build a 98 to drop in and not be in a hurry right at this moment or be deep out of pocket all at once. Anybody see a reason why this wouldn't be a good start? Also I have never tuned on my cars before cause I never got that far into it and I would rather learn on a junkyard motor first just in case I screw up. Am I on a right track or no?

 

[Turbo Monk3y]

I went 2.4L because the Skirts of the pistons are shorter on utilizing the 2.3L stroker pistons. From the 2.4L and 2.3L I have seen taken apart, there is always wear on the sides of the skirts of the 2.3L strokers. The 2.4L because of the longer skirt seem to not rock back and fourth as much as the 2.3L and they come out looking brand new. This is also the reason why more people report piston slap with a 2.3L because of the shorter skirt allows the piston to rock back and fourth in cold start up...(obviously depending on Piston clearances)

Also the wrist pin location was a problem for me as well, If your going to daily drive this, most people will utilize oil squirters. Well Oil consumption plays a part in the location of the wrist pin on the pistons of the 2.3Ls Its basically resting inside the bottom oil ring which in turn allows more oil consumption than a 2.4L piston which has the wrist pin located under the bottom oil ring. Plus oil constantly squirting on a 2.3L just consumes that much more oil. I am not running oil squirters on my 2.4L... I also did not want to have to add a quart of oil before I reach 2500-3000 miles for a real oil change.

Just food for thought.

 

[DSM-sagacious]

By stock ecu, i mean dsmlink is not a necessity until you start turning up the boost and need the ability to controll your fuel and timing. You can build your 64 and keep the boost arround stock levels and wait to get dsmlink if you choose. The stock maf will account for the extra air your new bigger motor is sucking in.

 

[crash27578]

Seems like with the extra .4 I would have to run lower boost with stock ecu settings because of the extra cfm's. Am I right?