2.4 with a t88

[talont3t4]

I think a T-88 is around the same size as a GT-42R which is 95lb/min wheel. I know Marco was using that and it got him to the mid 9's without nitrous. He was running 10:1 or higher compression and had quite a manifold I believe. You're probably better off with something in the 65-75lb/min range.

But Marco's car is probably 1000Lbs if not more lighter!

 

[91gstman]

But Marco's car is probably 1000Lbs if not more lighter!

hey bro any updates to ur website, man i love that talon of urs one of the sickest ones with that color, u have any more pics i dont see u have a gallery on here, i see some on ur site but would love to see more if u have some of the inside and more outside of ur car. that gun metal color realy works bro thanks

 

[herostar]

Great thread, but I think this is the point thats most important. Mitsubishi spent millions in R&D refining this engine to be the best 2.0L turbo on the planet. Not 2.1 or 2.3 or 2.4.

The 2.0L is a restriction in the WRC where the EVO races, which is what the 4g63 engine was made for. If they could go bigger we all know they would. Look at the WRX v. STI. The STi has the 2.5L engine (in the US) and is not legal for WRC, but makes more power. It's like the "Big Block." Just like our 2.4L is our Big Block.

 

[demografik]

Im not really sure why you would even want a t88. I mean whats wrong with a gt35r its what i run in my 3.2l m3 and there are m3's out there making over 700rwhp on this turbo. I mean the final decison is yours but i think the t88 is overkill and i would look long and hard at a gt35r with a .88 ar

 

[Venom69]

I'm not sure if I agree with the statement about the 2.0 being a restriction in the WRC. Look at what the fastest WRX's are running in australia( in the 8's). They run the EJ20 not the EJ25. Also theres a guy named shepard runs 8's also done on a 2.0, not a 2.4. In racing IMHO I think that a 2.4 would be the restriction especially in drag. I already have a 2.4 shortblock ready for my everyday driver but I won't even be using it this season because my little 2.0 will outrun it at the track.

 

[GPTourer]

I know about the restriction. It was probably done to restrict power, keep costs down so more and more manufacturers would join (they're talking about doing away with turbos altogether now for that very reason) But the point is Mitsubishi spent money to make the 2.0 the best and not anything else. We could theorize that they could have made the best 2.4L in the world if the rule were changed, but we'll never know. We know smaller engines tend to rev higher, so it gets more and more expensive to make a bigger engine reach the RPMs that we are used too. I don't think any of us can maintain the 2.0s high revving capability and durability and add displacement. Something else has to give. It seems to me that the '64 bottom end and/or crank tends to be an American DSM trend. Whereas the Evo tuners in Japan tend to use custom cranks and are satisfied with ~2.2L in '63 blocks. Is it because they are trying to maintain as much of the original geometry and revving capability as possible, with a little more displacement?

 

[Jon Lane]

OK kids, all the 2.0 vs. 2.4 stuff aside, what's the skinny on the exact dimensions of the 2.1 long rod in conjunction with a reliable street piston choice?

I'm thinking either (a) stock 2.4 pistons, or (b) Wiseco's with stock compression ratio. Anybody know if Scat makes such rods? And does the aftermarket, high-pin stroker piston stand up to street use at least as well as the stock 2G 2.0? Is the stock 2.4 an appropriate turbo piston for a moderate street motor?

 

[GPTourer]

I thought stock 2.4 pistons would give you some crazy high compression, and that they aren't the same design as a turbo piston.

 

[Revolution]

I know about the restriction. It was probably done to restrict power, keep costs down so more and more manufacturers would join (they're talking about doing away with turbos altogether now for that very reason) But the point is Mitsubishi spent money to make the 2.0 the best and not anything else. We could theorize that they could have made the best 2.4L in the world if the rule were changed, but we'll never know. We know smaller engines tend to rev higher, so it gets more and more expensive to make a bigger engine reach the RPMs that we are used too. I don't think any of us can maintain the 2.0s high revving capability and durability and add displacement. Something else has to give. It seems to me that the '64 bottom end and/or crank tends to be an American DSM trend. Whereas the Evo tuners in Japan tend to use custom cranks and are satisfied with ~2.2L in '63 blocks. Is it because they are trying to maintain as much of the original geometry and revving capability as possible, with a little more displacement?

Ok im going to try to shed some light on the obviouse & comon.
In retro spec to the asian tuners using the all mighty 2.2L in their time attack evos is to simply put it, have the best of both worlds.Yes the 2.L can rev higher but lacks some power down low hence the added displacement. The reason why they use their inhouse products is because ,it lets them run tighter r/d and especially tolorences,but in the end it's all about money. Some of us could point out that by using a destroked stroker and boring it out even more we could hypothetically speaking reach a displacement of 2.2 L, but would it be worth it is the question?These tuners make a living tuning and building cars and have the abbility to market their products like marco (magnus does) ,but will they give us the dimensions or specifications to their proprietery parts,,,no they wont.At the end of the day it's all about money.

Every body drops shep's name but how many of you have intimate knowledge of his engine setup or his piston size,let alone his anything concrete in his car?Thats right nobody , So lets not say ,well the 2.L revs higher so it's a better engine for the drag strip, dont be silly 98% of the people on this board could never dream of funding a transmission thats capable of taking advantage of anything over 9000rpm. Even when it comes to road racing would'nt you spin that high unless it's formula 1 , you will never ever enter or exit a corner that hot. In the end like every one has stated the 2.4L is the better motor for the street which by the way most of us only see.

[QUOTE/]I'm not sure if I agree with the statement about the 2.0 being a restriction in the WRC. Look at what the fastest WRX's are running in australia( in the 8's). They run the EJ20 not the EJ25. Also theres a guy named shepard runs 8's also done on a 2.0, not a 2.4. In racing IMHO I think that a 2.4 would be the restriction especially in drag. I already have a 2.4 shortblock ready for my everyday driver but I won't even be using it this season because my little 2.0 will outrun it at the track.[/QUOTE]

If we want to talk about straightline then take a look at most of the fastest imports in the world,their all 3.0L supra engines or just heavy in the displacement department, I have no doubt in my mind Marco will drop into the eights sometime soon , but because he runs such a tight ship ,he likes to keep almost everything in house ,so he could actually research and develop parts. Hence thats why he's such a great engine builder who's continuously building and refining a a drag car and many other race cars to boot. Point being I personally think the 2.4L is a better engine if built right. If any engine where to be built right with attention to all the details then we wouldn't hear about ,OH my 2.4L just spun a bearing. Nothing against other shops but if someone could build an engine that can last five to ten non stop wot events be for a refurbishing then it's good enough for me , considering I'm not putting anywhere near that amount of stress on it.

I personally don't have the money for a 2.4L so I'm going the 2.3L route , which has the same ideas behind it, properly built and maintained it will keep going for as long it can.

You could hypothetically benchrace all you want, in a road course a 2.1/2.2/2.3/2.4L will out performer a 2.L if everything except displacement was the same, why torque. Besides whom ever said that you cant rev a 2.3L or 2.4L up to 8000rpm? whats wrong with 8000 rpm? You could shift later all you want, on a stroked DSM engine you can get on the power faster.

In the end my point is unless you have intimate knowledge of Shep's program or any front runners program for that matter to share with the world behind their back don't drop his/her name as a reference because I highly doubt they'd want every Joe ,Tim and frank knowing their secrets.

If you've got hundreds of thousands of dollares to build an all out drag car then hey all the power to you ,if you don't but want a huge advantage part the engine accordingly and have a very reputable shop build it up. I'm all for the diy'er but don't complain when your motor pops ,then only to blame it on the engine. On the t88 topic, again you honestly don't have the coin to spend on the transmissions to even take advantage of the turbo , so look somewhere else, and honestly if you wanted to build an all out race car why talk to a board with out fully researching the data yourself, maybe because you didn't want to be banned from nabre on your very first post....,I wish you all the best, but build the engine and transmission first b4 even thinking about a turbo,oh and don't forget your shafts I'd hate to see you snap those things like twigs out of the whole.

 

[91gstman]

Im not really sure why you would even want a t88. I mean whats wrong with a gt35r its what i run in my 3.2l m3 and there are m3's out there making over 700rwhp on this turbo. I mean the final decison is yours but i think the t88 is overkill and i would look long and hard at a gt35r with a .88 ar

any more info on ur turbo m3 that must be sick with that gt35r

 

[Terrorize]

sorry bout takin so long to answer this, but, it just so happens that i own 94 t88 supra and its fully built, i mean 800-1000+rwhp depends on boost, ok first that turbo is so freakin big, i set my 60-1 thats on my talon next to the t88 and its no joke, even with that motor stroked and NOS itll be very hard to spool up a turbo that size. it still will take me til 4k to reach full boost and thats on a built 2jz. id stick with a 60-1 or something in that range, with a 2.4 and a 60-1 10s are easly achievable with the right mods and driver/tuning

 

[Venom69]

About what someone said about the fastest cars in the import drag scene, you just proved my point exactly. The fastest right now are running the 3.0 but divide a 3.0 by 6 cylinders you get .5 displacement per cylinder correct? Thats the exact same ratio as the 2.0 in the 4G63. Ohh and the last I heard Shepard was leading points in the IHRA drag Street tire class. Not the 3.0 Supras. If the ratios on the rods and pistons were the same as the 2.4s The displacement would be around a 3.6 liter motor. Any of you 2.4 guys running 10s yet in a quarter If so please say so. My 2.0 liter would bust a 2.4s A$$ in a quarter. I'll be headed down the drag strip in a few weeks I'll post my result with my 2.0 and any 2.4 that wants to compare timeslipes can go right ahead.

 

[Mike 99GSX]

Shepherd hasn't run in the street tire class since last year.

 

[hose101772]

Any of you 2.4 guys running 10s yet in a quarter If so please say so.

Tapp auto has a 2.4 daily driver doing 10 flat.Yea thats 10.0.How say ye now?

 

[Venom69]

What Times at the drag strip are you running Hose 101? Just curious. How do you like your 2.4? My next motor will be a stroker just to mess with something different. I have just done some looking and it seems like most cars are hitting some kind of wall with 2.3 2.4 around 11.00 in a quarter on most cars. Or does anybody here think it would be easier to go faster with a 2.4 in a quarter? From what I've seen most who go from a 2.4 to a 2.0 become faster. I need to easily break 10's with my car within the next month. Where did you find info on Shepard by the way? I've looked everywhere and can't find anything. I watch speed channel every Saturday night at Midnight and about twice a month the IHRA drag results will show. Two weeks ago it showed Shepard advancing to the finals and they said Shepard has a good lead in the points standing. Mabe I was watching last years? Not sure If anyone has info on where to see what his slow 2.0 is running let me know Thanks!

 

[hose101772]

Mines not a drag car.I'm building mine for response and powerband hence the b16g/stock cams.Hopefully to be an ok auto-x'er/daily driver soon.Still at over factory weight at the moment,cold AC,full power.Gona start taking weight out sooner or later.

Reguardless of purpose,it runs low to flat 8's in the 1/8 on pump gas.Traps out little over 110 in the 1/4 marked off by the house.

As fas as liking it,its great.Way more low end,starts spooling before 2k,revs to 8500.Its not as detonation prone as the 2.0.

Have considered one of those holset bolt no deals just to see what it could do at the dragstrip.Who knows, one day maybe.

Oh and hey-I looked up that 8sec WRX.Its only got 550hp.I wouldn't be using that as evidence to a 2.0 being better.

 

[eclipsegsxccca]

I plan on running my 2.4 on a t70 turbo. With all the right mods im sure we can hit better than 11.00 1/4 mi. should be more like 9 and 10s. But for now im going to take it slow and break it in. Ive only got 250 miles on it.

 

[1fastlaser]

www.tappauto.com

ams has acouple with 2.3s which is basically a 2.4 so really no difference,besides the 4g block and a different piston design.....but there in the 10s...and i dont doubt tapp being in the 9s vvvvvery soon