2g 2.4L 4g64 7-bolt Bottom End Swap.

[MNGSX]

Originally posted by HybridAWD
2.4L is good for anything whether it be a daily driver or drag car or strictly autocross. it's just easier to make power.

I agree that an easy way to make power is a displacement increase.

You still don't see to many 2.4's running single digit ET's.

I wish I had the funds to build a 2.4 and a 2.1-2.2 and dyno them with different turbos. There is an rpm where even with forced induction an engine can't get as full a breath of intake air just because the piston is moving too fast. You reach this point alot faster on a long stroke motor.

If a 2.4 were possible with the same stroke as a 2.0 (read big bore). It would still have less low end tq than a G64. Similar spool characteristics but kick a G64's but in from 4500 rpm and up.

I'm not saying that strokers are'nt cool or capable. Just like anything they have their pros, cons and limits. There is a reason why serious small block drag cars typically have alot shorter strokes than a 383 stroker. I'll have to find the article. The closest thing I can think of is a magazine built two small block chev turbo motors. One was a 383 stroker (400 crank 350 block) the other was a 350 block in a bored out 400 block. Lets just say that shorter strokes, high boost and high RPMs get along very well together.

Those two engines had a static displacement that was identical. One got there with stroke and the other with a big bore. They also had nearly identical static compression ratios.

I'd say about 85% of DSMers would do better with a stroker than a 2.0. If you are thinking 10's or better stick with the shorter stroke rev and build the trans (high rpm shifts) to match.


A 2.4 is 20% more displacement than a 2.0.

However

10,000 rpm is 40% more revs than 8,000.

So you are actually pumping more air (how engines make power) with the 2.0 at upper rpm than you would with a 2.4 at mid rpm.

Once you get above 8 the short stroke (2.0 or 2.1-2.2) has alot better VE than a 2.4 would at that RPM. It is also less likely to launch or break the same rod. Since a long stroke looses VE up top you probably take in alot more air at 10k on a 2.1 than a 2.4 at 8k.

 

[Pitbullgst]

I bought what was supposed to be a 4g64 from either a 99 or 2000 galant. it looks like a 2.4 for the 420a setup instead of the 4g63. the pulleys, etc. are on the wrong side. what the hell did I get?! will it still work?

 

[MNGSX]

With a 420a turbo kit...

That is a exactly the same as a GS spyder engine.

It's a chrylser engine.

Take it back or sell it.

 

[DSM mechanix]

Originally posted by Pitbullgst
I bought what was supposed to be a 4g64 from either a 99 or 2000 galant. it looks like a 2.4 for the 420a setup instead of the 4g63. the pulleys, etc. are on the wrong side. what the hell did I get?! will it still work?

It is a 4G64 only the block was rotated for the model year 99+ Galants and 00+ Eclipse. It wont work from what I know.

 

[HybridAWD]

Originally posted by MitsuE95GST
I never knew about the turbo PT pistons, if anyone knows of some good places to get them from please send me an e-mail. I would think that performance shops that do upgrades for the turbo versions would have some stock pistons laying around after a customer upgraded. Part numbers would be useful if someone has them so that you can request them direct from a dealer ship.

Ok lets recap a little bit since some people like yourself is getting confused about the PT pistons.

Me personally, probably wouldnt use the stock turbo PT pistons, but i dont see why you couldnt. I know their rods are the weak part and can only do about 350hpish. (dont quote me on that number)

As far as the pistons i dont know what they can do. It's obvious that they could "hold" most boost and create more power than the stock 4g64 pistons!

I'd just hate to see someone use the pistons and run into a problem blaming it back on me. Keep in mind what i did to the pistons as well, I milled the pistons .010" so they would sit right below the deck of the block. So for using the stock pistons, i'd test fit the pistons or just be safe a mill them like i did.

Ive attatched a picture to try and show you the pistons, but it's not a close up but you can see how they sit in there.

One more thing to not, the PT Cruiser pistons also have bigger valve reliefs cut into them, so you dont have to cut bigger reliefs for oversized valves.... at least mine fit perfectly.


http://www.we-todd-did-racing.com/wetoddimage.wtdr/i=wMTIyNTk0NnM0MTNkZmQzMXk1NDE=.jpg


***********************************

Mod Edit
Guys, Please do not post pics larger than 800x800 please

 

[RuBiCaNT5X]

Originally posted by MNGSX
I agree that an easy way to make power is a displacement increase.
A 2.4 is 20% more displacement than a 2.0.

However

10,000 rpm is 40% more revs than 8,000.

How do you figure? 10k is 20% more than 8k, unless I am missing something..

 

[MNGSX]

10k is 20% more than 8k

Actually 10k-8K = 2k 2k is 25% of 8k so 25% more rpms.

10k= 8k + 25% or 8k = 10k - 20%

We are both off.

I was because I actually meant approximately 40% more airflow at 10k on a 2.2 at 8k on 2.4 since the 2.4 is having breathing trouble at 8k.

 

[tim_w_jr]

I have nothing to say because I violated the following rules:

Though we do have paying advertisers who help support our site, we do not allow the promotion of products and services in our forums. Click here to promote your business on DSMtuners

• No spam, self promotion or advertising of products you sell or services you provide in the forums in any way - PERIOD. Vendors are encouraged to share their knowledge with our members in the forums, not promote their business. Quoting prices on products you sell or services you provide is not allowed. If you are a paying advertiser on DSMtuners.com, the only place you may promote your products and services is in the Vendor Announcement forum.
• Posting a link to your website in your member profile is fine - NOT in your posts or your signature.
• The posting of links, phone numbers, addresses, logos, or banners in your signature or in your posts is not allowed. You can post your info in your profile.
• We don't allow customer service discussions in the forums. Resolve it outside of the forums.
• Mentioning your products in a thread where a user is not specifically asking about your products is forbidden. Keeping all mention of your products and services out of the forums will ensure you do not get banned.
• Spamming our members via the Private Message feature or Email Feature of our website is also strictly against the rules.
• Sponsors do have special privileges, but the rules above apply to everyone.

 

[maximumbob]

I have a quick question. If one were to get a new 4g64 96-99 NT short block already assembled, would you just need new stronger rods and pistons? For example the crank and its bearings could just stay assembled assuming you don't have to clearance the block for the rods? Then you could just put in the piston rod assemblies with the NT bearings or new bearings?

 

[HybridAWD]

I have a quick question. If one were to get a new 4g64 96-99 NT short block already assembled, would you just need new stronger rods and pistons? For example the crank and its bearings could just stay assembled assuming you don't have to clearance the block for the rods? Then you could just put in the piston rod assemblies with the NT bearings or new bearings?

A friend of mine ran a stock 2.4L in his car with his T4, so i dont see why you couldnt. Id put new rod bearings in if your gonna put new rods in though. plus if your that far along having it apart, why not spend $70 more bucks or so and get all new bearings and check clearances. Id be smart to do that, why half ass things and just have something go wrong due to an old bearing or something?

 

[maximumbob]

Good point. Didn't really think of it that way, I guess $70 for both reassurance and new bearings isnt much at all in the big scheme of a build like this.

 

[HybridAWD]

yeah bearing are a cheap reassurance because what would be the point in "building" the motor and not putting new bearings in it. Plus you dont know the condition of the bearings in the first place either. Just a safe bet is all im saying or you could just buy my built 2.4

 

[GPTourer]

Any updates from any long term users of this conversion? Whether they have had CW or driving impressions with what turbos are they using and such? I have a '97 Galant and a pile of steadily growing spare parts that I was considering doing this too, and if it works out well, maybe I'll '64 the Eclipse.

 

[Torque1977]

Down here in El Paso Team DSM already has one 4g64 spyder running as a daily driver. My 4g64 will be done by Febuary. So far everything looks good and my friend's car runs great.
I went threw race engineering and got my rods and pistons. I had to custom order pistons since I went with the 4g64 crank. Im not doing the work on the engine my friend Ray Luna is his a master with this Mitsu's. Good luck with the projects and it can be done.
My block came from a 2000 eclipse.

 

[sophat34]

well, I have had my 4g64 put together for about a year now, (ross pistons, paulter rods, some nice head work, 272's, and a magnus smim) its got about 2100 miles on the set up. I finaly turned to boost up to 15 lbs, car was running great. seemed like I had a lot more power than I did with the 63 in the lower rpms. this is with a super 20g. spool up is great. I did a 7 bolt with a 97 galant block. however now I seem to have hit a problem, when I started the car up I had a scraping noise then it quit and followed up with a knocking, sounded almost like a disel motor. seems to be coming from cyl number 4. I think it is probibaly something come loose or an error on the part of the shop that put it together. I'll post more when I get time to take it apart. any one with speculations feel free to let me know, because at this point I have no idea what it could be.

 

[GPTourer]

Good luck with the projects and it can be done.
My block came from a 2000 eclipse.

Well that's good to know that the reverse orientation doesn't matter when you get down to the bare block.

I think it is probibaly something come loose or an error on the part of the shop that put it together.

Ouch.

 

[spshocker61]

Alright....my current research is on whether i want to go with the Magnus long rod setup (http://www.magnusmotorsports.com/engines.htm)...or if i would be better off w. the shorter rod/large bore setup. I read this whole thread...and from what i understand the long rod setups are good for lower end power? And the shorter rods w/ 2.4L bore are better for your 1/4 mile times and higher end power. Sorry to re-itterate things, i just want to be sure I know what is being said here. basicly what i understand is that the preffered choice is the 4g63 rod length with the bore of the 2.4L's, correct? Thank you

PS- I know i kind of brought this thread back from a pretty deep grave....but i also know that the favorite word around here is "search"...so thats how i ended up here

 

[gixrman]

Alright....my current research is on whether i want to go with the Magnus long rod setup (http://www.magnusmotorsports.com/engines.htm)...or if i would be better off w. the shorter rod/large bore setup. I read this whole thread...and from what i understand the long rod setups are good for lower end power? And the shorter rods w/ 2.4L bore are better for your 1/4 mile times and higher end power. Sorry to re-itterate things, i just want to be sure I know what is being said here. basicly what i understand is that the preffered choice is the 4g63 rod length with the bore of the 2.4L's, correct? Thank you

PS- I know i kind of brought this thread back from a pretty deep grave....but i also know that the favorite word around here is "search"...so thats how i ended up here

Honestly I would call MAGNUS and explain to them what you want, they build the motors they know whats best. My understanding is that if you go to the long rod you gain back the motors high RPM capabilities and improve cylinder filling with the change in piston speed over the standard 2.4.

 

[Big Woo]

A few points to consider.

1: A change in stroke length will have the biggest effect on piston speed.
2: Long rod motors are generally considered better for higher RPMs.
3: Short rod motors are generally considered better for lower RPM applications.
4: A longer rods will actually increase piston speed over a shorter rod for a given stroke length. This is because a longer rods increases the dwell time of the piston at both top dead center, and bottom dead center in terms of degrees of crankshaft rotation, therefore for a given stroke length, a longer rod has less time to travel the length of stroke, for a given RPM.


I would also suggest that you do as gixman suggests, and call someone in the business. Build a repore with them, and together determine what is best for your application.

 

[spshocker61]

Thanks for the advice, I think i'll be calling Magnus to have a chat with them. I think they would be the best to talk with because they offer both short and long rod setups so i wouldnt get a biased opinion

But, im still open to anyone elses opinion who has experience with a 2.4 build, especially anyone who has built a long rod setup.

One other thing....as far as i have seen, Magnus is the only company that carries the long rod setup for us, is that right?

Thanks agian,
Nate

 

[TurboGarageTech]

4: A longer rods will actually increase piston speed over a shorter rod for a given stroke length. This is because a longer rods increases the dwell time of the piston at both top dead center, and bottom dead center in terms of degrees of crankshaft rotation, therefore for a given stroke length, a longer rod has less time to travel the length of stroke, for a given RPM.

Partially right. Longer rods actually decrease instantaneous piston velocities (most notably right around TDC and BDC). The piston accelerates away from TDC for instance more slowly with a longer rod (for a given stroke length) than with a shorter rod. However, it's worthwhile to note that if you're talking about mean piston speeds, obviously rod length has no effect as long as the stroke stays the same. The dwell time increase you enjoy is a function of the fact that the piston accelerates away from TDC slower than with a short rod.

The main reason (IMO) to go with a long rod 2.4 is that a long rod design puts less stress on the pistons and bearings (reduced side loading due to reduced centerline angle). You are also runner lighter pistons, with the associated benefits.

If you're talking strictly numbers, a short rod motor is actually capable of generating more torque, due to the fact that it achieves a 90 deg. rod/crank angle in less time (as measured by crank degrees) with the piston higher in the bore.

However, when you're only talking about a rod length difference of about 4%, most of these differences are lost in the noise anyway. Real world testing has shown that the long rod 2.4 is more robust and capable of quite a bit more RPM with a better powerband.

Talk to Marco at Magnus, he's been doing this quite a bit longer than me and is who I would consider one of the most knowledgable builders of 4G strokers.

 

[spshocker61]

Thanks for the info...I guess i basicly had the right idea, but it was nice reading it the way you laid it all out. But i have def. decided that when im ready to move from the research stage to the developmental stage that I'll be giving Marco a call. I will proabably actually call him a little before that point seems a few of my other options for the build will be affected by the decision. Thanks again!

 

[shoguntalon]

can anyone repost the pics of the 5 holes that need to be plugged the pic doesnt seem to work?

 

[shoguntalon]

do you need to make any holes for water or coolent or anything like that in the block ?

 

[shoguntalon]

So after you do a 7 bolt 4g63/64 conversion what will you need to change fuel wise with the compression ratio being different?