Advantages of a 2.1 Stroker?

[ZABMANN]

Are there any advantages to de-stroking my 2.4 to 2.1?

 

[klevur1]

SBR_JOE: i'm curious as to how much the build cost

-any video?

 

[Strm Trpr]

this was all on an evo8. And yes, the turbo tuffs...i dont recommend anything less with the capabilities of this motor...would be senseless.

EDIT: he was using the magnus cast intake manifold.


Joe
SBR

Ah, Evo VIII...
What makes the Manley Turbo Tuff's so special?
Is it because they are off the shelf 156mm rods that can handle 1000+hp?
Aluminum Rods can do that and then some as well as rev higher because they weigh what, 200 grams less?
I think my money will be on 156mm BME Aluminum Rods and 2.3L CP Stroker Pistons spun by an Evo crank in my freshly cryo-treated revised thrust washer 7-bolt.
Throw a SBR Stage III 2g head on it with Kelford 272's and a JMF Race SMIM and call it a day.

 

[SBR Joe]

Ah, Evo VIII...
What makes the Manley Turbo Tuff's so special?
Is it because they are off the shelf 156mm rods that can handle 1000+hp?
Aluminum Rods can do that and then some as well as rev higher because they weigh what, 200 grams less?
I think my money will be on 156mm BME Aluminum Rods and 2.3L CP Stroker Pistons spun by an Evo crank in my freshly cryo-treated revised thrust washer 7-bolt.
Throw a SBR Stage III 2g head on it with Kelford 272's and a JMF Race SMIM and call it a day.

the turbo tuffs are the I beams. and its only because i dont think an H beam rod will handle the HIGH rpms this motor can withstand.

 

[SBR Joe]

SBR_JOE: i'm curious as to how much the build cost

-any video?

Id post it but i cant overstep boundaries because im not set back up as a supporting vendor yet. For now if you want pricing PM me. i will tell you im sure you will find the pricing nothing short of amazing.


Joe
SBR

 

[Strm Trpr]

~$770 156mm Manley Turbo Tuffs Slowboy Racing, Inc. :: Mitsubishi :: DSM :: Engine :: Connecting Rods :: Manley Performance :: Manley 156mm Length I-Beam
~$450 for Manley 2.3L Stroker Pistons, but you can use any 2.3L Stroker Pistons
Slowboy Racing, Inc. :: Mitsubishi :: DSM :: Engine :: Pistons :: Manley Pistons :: 2.3L Stroker Pistons :: Manley 93-99 7 Bolt 4G63 8.5:1 Stroker Pistons (.020 Over Bore Only)

 

[SBR Joe]

~$770 156mm Manley Turbo Tuffs Slowboy Racing, Inc. :: Mitsubishi :: DSM :: Engine :: Connecting Rods :: Manley Performance :: Manley 156mm Length I-Beam
~$450 for Manley 2.3L Stroker Pistons, but you can use any 2.3L Stroker Pistons
Slowboy Racing, Inc. :: Mitsubishi :: DSM :: Engine :: Pistons :: Manley Pistons :: 2.3L Stroker Pistons :: Manley 93-99 7 Bolt 4G63 8.5:1 Stroker Pistons (.020 Over Bore Only)

PM me for BETTER pricing.

Joe
SBR

 

[SBR Joe]

Or if you want, you can PM me for a fully built short block with no core due. Price=AMAZINGNESS.


Joe
SBR

 

[Strm Trpr]

the turbo tuffs are the I beams. and its only because i dont think an H beam rod will handle the HIGH rpms this motor can withstand.

These Carrillo Pro H-Beams with the CARR Rod Bolts seem to be able to handle plenty of power.
Even the WMC Bolt can handle 250hp each.
Scroll down to the middle of the page where it states "Rod Selection Guide".
Carrillo Connecting Rods

Here's a little more info on the different Carrillo Rods and Rod Bolts.
Carrillo Connecting Rods for Domestic V8: Chevy, Ford, Mopar

 

[SBR Joe]

EDIT!!!

His boost gauge was reading off. This dyno run was actually at 23 PSI!!!!! Not 26!!!


NOW who wants to jump on the long rod bandwagon....Ron Jeremy is driving!!! HAHAHAHHA



Joe
SBR

 

[Strm Trpr]

EDIT!!!

His boost gauge was reading off. This dyno run was actually at 23 PSI!!!!! Not 26!!!


NOW who wants to jump on the long rod bandwagon....Ron Jeremy is driving!!! HAHAHAHHA



Joe
SBR

So you're saying that power and torque was made on only 23psi.
Actually that seems closer to what I would expect from a HTA3582R.

Nice... again, what fuel was he using?

 

[4gsx63]

Since were talking motor combo's, here's a nice little break down:

http://www.magnusmotorsports.com/tech/DetailedEngineList.pdf

Me likey 2.2L

You can have mine...for a few bucks

 

[mysticj]

Why 9000+ rpm...go higher with a 4G64 and 4G61 crank!!!

 

[Strm Trpr]

I've always wanted to do this build.
4G63 bored .020" over
Light Weight 94mm Eagle Crank
Custom 153mm Carrillo Pro H-Beams Rods
8.5:1 2.3L Stroker Pistons, CP or Manley

I think this build is a best of both worlds.
Hunter S. Thompson said, "Anything worth doing, is worth doing right"!

Instead of being stroked a full 12mm like the 2.3L, it's only stroked 6mm.
Instead of being a full 6mm longer rod, like the long rod 2.0L, the rods are only 3mm longer.

So it's both stroked and long rod in one package with a displacement of 2.16L and a rod/stroke ratio of 1.63...

Now I just need to grab my scrote, buy it all, and just fcukin build it!

 

[Strm Trpr]

You can have mine...for a few bucks

I recognize that motor.
Can you still get your auto tensioner on with the ATI Dampner in the way?

You think you're gonna be ok with those 11:1 pistons?
I assume she'll be on a liquid diet of strictly corn juice?

My build will have to be on 91 and 70/30 meth/water injection

 

[4gsx63]

I recognize that motor.
Can you still get your auto tensioner on with the ATI Dampner in the way?

You think you're gonna be ok with those 11:1 pistons?
I assume she'll be on a liquid diet of strictly corn juice?

My build will have to be on 91 and 70/30 meth/water injection

This motor was build with E98 in mind. The damper was test fit only. Saving for a twin disk and a nice shift-box to compliment the long block. Hopefully the funds don't run out before then.

 

[TunaTalon]

A better word picture for why low rod ratios produce more torque occurred to me last night. The velocity profiles are different, see figure 24 of http://www.kidzuku.com/StrokeOrNot.pdf .

The lower rod ratios have higher velocities at the top of the stroke where the cylinder pressure is higher. The higher velocity means that the pistons moves more inches per degree of crankshaft rotation giving a higher mechanical advantage at the top of the stroke. This should mean that the low rod ratio is best at making torque while the cylinder pressure is high.

The higher rod ratios have a higher piston velocity at the bottom of the stroke. This should mean that the higher mechanical advantage while cylinder pressure is lower will be more efficient at getting the last bit of energy from the charge.

This word picture is based on the same math as my post 31 but seems to explain the effect better.

 

[SBR Joe]

So you're saying that power and torque was made on only 23psi.
Actually that seems closer to what I would expect from a HTA3582R.

Nice... again, what fuel was he using?

93 octane, no meth.


Joe
SBR

 

[Strm Trpr]

A better word picture for why low rod ratios produce more torque occurred to me last night. The velocity profiles are different, see figure 24 of http://www.kidzuku.com/StrokeOrNot.pdf .

The lower rod ratios have higher velocities at the top of the stroke where the cylinder pressure is higher. The higher velocity means that the pistons moves more inches per degree of crankshaft rotation giving a higher mechanical advantage at the top of the stroke. This should mean that the low rod ratio is best at making torque while the cylinder pressure is high.

The higher rod ratios have a higher piston velocity at the bottom of the stroke. This should mean that the higher mechanical advantage while cylinder pressure is lower will be more efficient at getting the last bit of energy from the charge.

This word picture is based on the same math as my post 31 but seems to explain the effect better.

That's all fine and dandy, but 2.3L's are like a teenaged boy in bed with a girl for the first time.
They're all pent up, quick to get in there, no fore play, just mad power for the few seconds it takes to spool up, full torque by 4k rpm, breaks the transmission and then and drops like a rock and falls fast asleep losing over 200 ft*lbs of torque by 7krpm...
To me, that's a big ...

That dyno plot SBR Joe posted up of that long rod 2.0L is the shit.
It has almost 2500rpms of full torque.
The area under the power band is huge.
Power keeps building until the driver lifted.
Torque tapered off, but not until 7500rpm and it dropped about 60-70 ft*lbs by 8500rpm... screaming shift and do it all over again!
I'd set my rev limiter there and rock that set-up on the street in a heart beat.
I guarantee that motor will run down a 2.3L on the back side of the 1320, no problem!

Here's an example of what I found to be a typical 2.3L dyno plot with a mid sized turbo.
2.3L Evo, GT3076R, on C16 at 30psi with HKS 280's

 

[SBRChance]

My 2.0 build will be starting in hopefully about two weeks!! Then time to strap on that beautiful Billet 5557 thats chillin on my desk right now

 

[e85_4g63]

I saw the turbo tuff rods also. Joe, do you have a gram weight on those rods? I'm also wonder what aluminum rods you can get your hands on? I have a 6 bolt already machined (block / crank). No rods or pistons yet though. Everything is standard size (jdm motor, just tore it down to build on the side). I tried calling your number this morning but it rang like 3 times then made a weird beep noise? (fax machine maybe?). I'll try again when I get home from work. What are your hours? (I'm on EST also).

 

[TSIfreek]

Joe,
spending that kind of money why not just go with a simple aluminum rod motor? Aluminum rod motors are proven to keep the rod bearings happy at high RPMs. You also get the advantage of a lighter rotating assembly.
Heavy steel I beam rods are very hard on rod bearings no???

 

[Black94DSM]

This thread is peaking my interest. Subscribed!

 

[TunaTalon]

That's all fine and dandy, but 2.3L's are like a teenaged boy in bed with a girl for the first time.
They're all pent up, quick to get in there, no fore play, just mad power for the few seconds it takes to spool up, full torque by 4k rpm, breaks the transmission and then and drops like a rock and falls fast asleep losing over 200 ft*lbs of torque by 7krpm...
To me, that's a big ...

That post was referenced back to my post 31 which addressed Matt’s question about why the long rod 2.0L made more torque than the 2.1L. As my post 31 spells out the 2.0L has a lower rod ratio than the 2.1L. That post was not about the 2.3L.

The long rod 2.0 dyno chart shows more torque than the 2.1L. Some people want a visual word picture to explain such things.

But now that you mention it; wam bam thank you mam is a pretty good way to get through the intersection after getting the green light. Instant gratification is still gratifying.

Goals are never wrong.

 

[kpsc93TSi]

im really new to this stuff and got a heck of a deal on the car i got... well it has no real internal work done... no head work just a thicker gasket. i know what i wana do with the head but i was thinking about a 2.3L stroker. and getting an 18G to replace my B16G just so it doesnt have to work hard its hole life. so ne way you can buy these "stroker kits" online... will these kits work with the stock 4g63 motor?

 

[Strm Trpr]

I saw the turbo tuff rods also. Joe, do you have a gram weight on those rods? I'm also wonder what aluminum rods you can get your hands on? I have a 6 bolt already machined (block / crank). No rods or pistons yet though. Everything is standard size (jdm motor, just tore it down to build on the side). I tried calling your number this morning but it rang like 3 times then made a weird beep noise? (fax machine maybe?). I'll try again when I get home from work. What are your hours? (I'm on EST also).

Manley's I-Beam Rod Weights are as follows:
The 150mm 6-bolt rods weigh 690 grams.
The 150mm 7-bolt rods weigh 675 grams.
The 150mm 7-bolt non-tapered stroker rod weighs 637 grams.
The 156mm 7-bolt rods weigh 694 grams.
The 162mm 7-bolt rods weigh 703 grams.
The 150mm 6-bolt H-Beam weigh 573 grams.
The 150mm 7-bolt H-Beam weigh 554 grams.

That post was referenced back to my post 31 which addressed Matt’s question about why the long rod 2.0L made more torque than the 2.1L. As my post 31 spells out the 2.0L has a lower rod ratio than the 2.1L. That post was not about the 2.3L.

The long rod 2.0 dyno chart shows more torque than the 2.1L. Some people want a visual word picture to explain such things.

But now that you mention it; wam bam thank you mam is a pretty good way to get through the intersection after getting the green light. Instant gratification is still gratifying.

Goals are never wrong.

I hear what you're saying, to each his own...
I really need to get a ride in a well prepped 2.3L and see what that's all about.