2.4 Head gasket

[talon14turbo]

I have a 2.4 block 6-bolt with 1g heads. Which head gasket do I use? Can someone give a me a OEM part number?

 

[92tsiawdguy]

I like people on dsm tuners you are all very smart and you know your stuff.

 

[VETTE_50_TH]

I wouldn't want anything smaller than 272's on an engine larger than 2.0. More displacement makes the same cams 'smaller'. Sometimes I almost wish I would've went with 280's even. My BC272's gained me power everywhere and the spool is identical to stock cams.

Thats a good point. But with me and a few other guys running T3 turbos, 3in intercooler pipes, Q45 TB, SMIM's, having those bigger cams makes a big difference. Its all about balance.

James

 

[talon14turbo]

I have just about replaced or repaired all the "rigged-up crap" the previous owner screwed up. The car looks like a totally different vehicle inside-out.

Now I am trying to get the heads finished, but I need to be clear on what I have because I am finding that the previous punk was not very truthful.

Attached are pictures of the heads & valves (which should have only had 500 miles on them (liar) and pictures of the cams:

Can you tell if the cams are actually comp 280's and if the valve and/or springs are brian crower parts.

The numbers on the cams are: 101-202-8E & 101-201-8I

 

[VETTE_50_TH]

By the looks of it, those are not BC springs. The retainers should say "BC" somewhere on them and those do not. It does look like you have 3g revised lifters. Also, the cams look off brand.

James

 

[92tsiawdguy]

those are 272s!!! thats what i have in mine.

 

[talon14turbo]

By the looks of it, those are not BC springs. The retainers should say "BC" somewhere on them and those do not. It does look like you have 3g revised lifters. Also, the cams look off brand.

James

It seems that no one is honest these days. Do the valves & springs look stock? I got this stuff from a guy named Michael in Tennessee and he said that they were Brian Crower SS valves. Beware of the crook.

Did you see the section on the heads under the valves? That's the area that had me concerned and why I did not try the have the head resurfaced. So I purchased a rebuilt head from a professional shop.

 

[VETTE_50_TH]

Yea, that deck surface looks like shit. Sorry about that. Did you see my pics. Thats from my built head. I wish i took a pic of the valve springs but i dont have one. Hope everything works out.

James

 

[interex]

WTF... That combustion chamber is filled with cement?

those are 272s!!! thats what i have in mine.

Oh yea? what makes you say that? Because your 272s and his both say EP4604? Wrong... That is nothing more than a CASTING number. The grind numbers will be located elsewhere.


92tsiawdguy Also I still don't think you're understanding. 272's are good cams but in a 2.4 they aren't the same as in a 2.0, so I hope you're talking about 272s in a DOHC 2.4... If you want the feel and performance of the 272 in a 2.4L you're going to need something like 280s.

 

[92tsiawdguy]

The cams have the same 101 201 8e thats how i know they are the samd. .and does ## engine even run interex? No! youre just going off what you read. if you want the most hp you need a stroker cam. good lift with long duration. normal cams have high lift. stroker cams have the best of both. they call them square lob cams. I havd tested both of these cams 280s and 272s. i like 272s but i will be getting a set of fp3 stroker cams. put 280s in yours interex. dont cry to dsm tuners when u bend your valves or mess up your retainers

 

[interex]

92tsiawdguy, I think you need to spend a little more time reading about this before you comment. I'm sure all 1500 people I've read about who are using 280 cams with 2.3L strokers which is really no different than using a 2.4L with a DOHC... are blowing their engines up, or just damaging all their valves because YOU say that's what will happen.

The springs and retainers I have are for use with the 280 cams so I'm sure you knew that already since you're running a SBR Stage VI built head for use with 280 cams hmm... I guess I'll have to call Crower up and bi*** at them for telling me that the Manley springs SBR put in my head will work with the 280 cams they sold me. I guess the guys at SBR lied when they said the valves and springs, and retainers will not work for my 2.4L build with 280 cams.

Thanks but I'll stick with the DSM Wisemen who I talk to and am friends with over a newb with 23 posts.

 

[VETTE_50_TH]

Ha. Interex, you are an idiot. I chatted with kyle (92tsiawdguy) for over an hour about his car and he is no newb. He is very knowledgeable and def. knows his stuff. Case in point, when i was down at JNZ discussing my car, as soon as i said im running 280 cams with BC springs/retainers, the owner, immediately asked me, how high are you revving? Reason being, as soon as you go to 10k, 11k those valves will float, allowing the piston to come within mm's of hitting. And i definitely do not want to send my head out to Wes Hess again. read my profile if you need info.

James

 

[interex]

And... how many people do you know running 2.3L or 2.4L engines rev that high? MY engine will not rev that high, I won't need to rev high to make power... I also will trust all the people in the dyno sheets and people with PROVEN specs who have used the 280 cams and shown them to be a better RACE cam than using the 272 cam.

You can call names all you like... That's not showing how well you listen, or understand, or how well you KNOW anything.

Not to mention... the lift difference between the 272, and 280 cams is only 0.53/0.94 I/E (mm). So don't act as if there is several mm difference in lift.

 

[VETTE_50_TH]

Running a 280 cam on any motor, whether is a 2.0, 2.3, or 2.4 or a destroked 2.1; you run the risk of floating the valve. The valve expends WAY passed a normal dsm cam would and on these motors, the 280 cams because of how much lift they have, cant even have both valves shut at the same time.

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

Im not here to argue. You will do what you were told to do, so its over. Its not worth fighting over.

James

 

[talon14turbo]

I thank all of you for your help because you are helping me to get a little closer to getting this car running as it should.

I am about to order the Brian Crower springs & retainers # bc0100 and the Cometic gasket for the 4G64 /2.4 Litre (86.5mm bore). I will install the head gasket with copper spray on a new freshly rebuilt head. I will use the 280 cam (if that's what it is) and the lifters (shown in the pic).
Any other suggestions?

 

[92tsiawdguy]

yea James is right. I know what i know from personal use. I own 2 2g eclipse and 3 1g eclipses and ive been doing my own work before i ever even knew about this site. coming on 6 years now. everything from a 2.0 that revs to 10k to my stroker that revs to 8k. Some people think they know everything. But not everyone can be smart.

 

[interex]

I am trying to figure out how the 280 has WAY MORE LIFT than the 272 that you claim is the god of all cams. Although it has MORE lift, it isnt more than what the engine can be equiped with.

The 280 has .021" more than the 272 on Intake, and .037" more than the 272 on Exhaust.

You're going to sit here and tell the world... even all the people who have bought and use 280 cams that they have too much lift to use 280 cams? That all their engines are destroyed because they used 280 cams and revved high? Even all the people who race, and make serious power with them and swear by them?

You can't even see a difference with them installed and rotating the cam between the 280 Intake/Exhaust Lift: 10.71mm/10.60mm and the 272 Intake/Exhaust Lift: 10.18mm/9.66mm with your eyes.

92tsiawdguy You can claim you know the queen of England but that makes no difference here, we're on the internet, on a forum, and according to the forum you're new here so that is why I said I'll stick to what I know works, and what has been proven to work. I haven't shelled out thousands apon thousands of dollars to just piece by piece my engine together. I know you're dead set on the 272 cams, and I understand your reasoning but my original, and current statement is... using a 272 on a 2.4L will be like using slightly bigger than STOCK cams on a 2.0L engine. The more displacement you have the smaller the cam will act. I maintain that IF you like how the 272 is in a 2.0L then you will want 280 cams in a 2.4L. The 2.4L engine isnt one I would even recommend trying to build power with or revving past 8800 RPM and the Manley, and Crower springs and titanium retainers will handle that with 280s in a 2.4L. (without dual or beehive springs). But I won't say you shouldn't use dual springs with 280s revving that high.

 

[VETTE_50_TH]

I am trying to figure out how the 280 has WAY MORE LIFT than the 272 that you claim is the god of all cams. Although it has MORE lift, it isnt more than what the engine can be equiped with.

The 280 has .021" more than the 272 on Intake, and .037" more than the 272 on Exhaust.

You're going to sit here and tell the world... even all the people who have bought and use 280 cams that they have too much lift to use 280 cams? That all their engines are destroyed because they used 280 cams and revved high? Even all the people who race, and make serious power with them and swear by them?

You can't even see a difference with them installed and rotating the cam between the 280 Intake/Exhaust Lift: 10.71mm/10.60mm and the 272 Intake/Exhaust Lift: 10.18mm/9.66mm with your eyes.

92tsiawdguy You can claim you know the queen of England but that makes no difference here, we're on the internet, on a forum, and according to the forum you're new here so that is why I said I'll stick to what I know works, and what has been proven to work. I haven't shelled out thousands apon thousands of dollars to just piece by piece my engine together. I know you're dead set on the 272 cams, and I understand your reasoning but my original, and current statement is... using a 272 on a 2.4L will be like using slightly bigger than STOCK cams on a 2.0L engine. The more displacement you have the smaller the cam will act. I maintain that IF you like how the 272 is in a 2.0L then you will want 280 cams in a 2.4L. The 2.4L engine isnt one I would even recommend trying to build power with or revving past 8800 RPM and the Manley, and Crower springs and titanium retainers will handle that with 280s in a 2.4L. (without dual or beehive springs). But I won't say you shouldn't use dual springs with 280s revving that high.

I didnt know that length of time on a forum and the number of posts you have equate to knowledge? If thats the case, John Shepard would be an idiot. WTF

Again, its not worth arguing over, you will do what you want to, and he will do what he wants to. Simple as that.

James

 

[interex]

The argument isnt about who will do what. The argument was about what he said vs what I said. His post wasn't accurate, and he's being very misleading.