Cams for a 2.2 stroker

[GUTSI]

Hey guys...

The setup I currently have is the Magnus 2.2 stroker (92mm crank) and HKS 264/272 cams.

I've searched on cam setups with strokers, but only found info relating to the 2.3....and with a 2.3 setup, the general consensus is that 272's (both) would work very well in a streetcar...I've also read that 280's work as well.

My question is, since the 2.2 isnt "truly" 2.2 liters (its actually 2.15), is there a need to upgrade my intake cam to a 272? Would a pair of 280's be beneficial?

In other words, will I benefit large from upgrading...or will it suffice to leave the 264/272 combo in? And maybe reap the benefits from having them degreed instead?
The motor hasnt been dropped back in the car yet, so the cams are brand spanking new (had the cams way before the rebuild, and I didnt anticipate a stroker, but my crank went to the shits)

The head is completely stock....for now, its only the bottom end thats been fully built.

I know the 2.2 is a fairly rare setup, there's more 2.3 and 2.4's. If anyone has any personal experiences with the 2.2, or any pertinent info, it would be much appreciated!

 

[Slippi84]

2.2's are destroked not stroked motors and I asked the same question here http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/stroker-tech/310730-anyone-have-any-experience-2-2l.html

 

[booostedGSX]

If I'm not mistaken, the 2.2L motors generally rev higher, so in theory you would more than likely benefit from a 272 intake cam. I'm not too sure how 280s would react with a 2.2L, but when you start looking at 280s, you really should upgrade the rest of the valvetrain.

Someone correct me if I am wrong.

 

[Slippi84]

If I'm not mistaken, the 2.2L motors generally rev higher, so in theory you would more than likely benefit from a 272 intake cam. I'm not too sure how 280s would react with a 2.2L, but when you start looking at 280s, you really should upgrade the rest of the valvetrain.

Someone correct me if I am wrong.

No your pretty much right except you kinda make it seem like 272's are more for high reving then 280's which is backwards. But again that's just how it came across but other than that you got it

 

[booostedGSX]

That's what I was afraid of. I didn't mean for it to sound like 272s are for higher revving, which, as you stated, is not the truth. 280s are going to make power later in the powerband and would definitely go pretty well with a 2.2L. But then again, you would almost have to upgrade springs, retainers, guides, etc.

 

[Slippi84]

That's what I was afraid of. I didn't mean for it to sound like 272s are for higher revving, which, as you stated, is not the truth. 280s are going to make power later in the powerband and would definitely go pretty well with a 2.2L. But then again, you would almost have to upgrade springs, retainers, guides, etc.

Pretty much but it would depend on your hp and overall goals which cams are right.

 

[GUTSI]

2.2's are destroked not stroked motors and I asked the same question here http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/stroker-tech/310730-anyone-have-any-experience-2-2l.html

How do you figure? I'm still using a 4G63 block, not a 4G64. Hence why my setup is a STROKER!

 

[GUTSI]

If I'm not mistaken, the 2.2L motors generally rev higher, so in theory you would more than likely benefit from a 272 intake cam. I'm not too sure how 280s would react with a 2.2L, but when you start looking at 280s, you really should upgrade the rest of the valvetrain.

Someone correct me if I am wrong.

Makes sense. When it was a 2.0 liter, the reason I opted for the 264 intake was to retain some low-end torque. Now that its gonna be 2.2, torque levels should increase slightly which is why Im thinking a 272 intake would be a nice compromise...

Anybody know if I keep my current setup (264/272) and just degree them...would that help?

 

[JayRolla]

Dont worry about low end tq. When your running it at the track you wont even see that tq. Power to get you down the track is going to be in the higher rpms. I would at least upgrade to 272 over that 264. Also upgrading valvetrain is a good idea anyways since you will want to rev that thing to at least 8500rpms.

 

[Slippi84]

How do you figure? I'm still using a 4G63 block, not a 4G64. Hence why my setup is a STROKER!

How do you plan on getting a true 2.2 displacement than using a 4g63 block?

 

[Slippi84]

For a 92mm Magnus crankshaft:
85mm bore = 2088cc
85.5mm bore = 2113
86mm bore = 2138
86.5mm bore = 2163
87mm bore = 2188
87.5mm bore = 2213
88mm bore = 2238
Rod Ratios: stock piston, 148mm rod = 1.61
stroker piston, 154mm rod = 1.67
stroker piston, 2.4 block, 160mm rod = 1.74

 

[GUTSI]

How do you plan on getting a true 2.2 displacement than using a 4g63 block?

It was never my intention to get "true 2.2 liter displacement" (that would involve a true cylinder rebore)

If you read my original post, I actually admit that the stroker 2.2 isnt a true 2.2 anyway, plus my over-bore is only .020 over.

Look, you earlier incorrectly stated that my 2.2 was "destroked". How can it be "destroked", if Im using a 4G63 block? If I was using a 4G64 block, then my 2.2 would've been "destroked"

Thats my point, is all.

 

[1gDSM4g63]

It all depends on your intended goals to decide which cams will work best for you.

Higher degree cams work in the top-end whereas lower degree cams do the work in earlier rpms. Therefore if you have a small turbo lower degree cams will work best rather than having the turbo spool before the cams do the work in the top-end.



As for your block being a true stroker or not, did you put stroker pistons and different size rods because there are 0.020 stroker pistons.

 

[turbo addict]

It all depends on your intended goals to decide which cams will work best for you.

Higher degree cams work in the top-end whereas lower degree cams do the work in earlier rpms. Therefore if you have a small turbo lower degree cams will work best rather than having the turbo spool before the cams do the work in the top-end.



As for your block being a true stroker or not, did you put stroker pistons and different size rods because there are 0.020 stroker pistons.

It says he is using a 4g63 block and a 92mm crank. Stock is 88mm. so yes it is a stroker.

 

[Slippi84]

It was never my intention to get "true 2.2 liter displacement" (that would involve a true cylinder rebore)

If you read my original post, I actually admit that the stroker 2.2 isnt a true 2.2 anyway, plus my over-bore is only .020 over.

Look, you earlier incorrectly stated that my 2.2 was "destroked". How can it be "destroked", if Im using a 4G63 block? If I was using a 4G64 block, then my 2.2 would've been "destroked"

Thats my point, is all.

Oh ok so your building a 2.1 stroker setup. Your title is misleading but I understand what your saying. Everything in the thread I posted is still valid and relates to yoru situation and build.

 

[TunaTalon]

We're getting twisted around the shaft on the common names of various strokes and deck heights for the 4G6X engine.

For any given stroke the "actual displacement" will vary with the bore and the displacements overlap for different set-ups. To make life (and communications) a littler simpler each common set-up of bore and deck height is given a name that may or may not be the exact displacement.

2.0L the stock stroke (88mm) in the 4G63 block
2.1L 88mm stroke in a 4G64 block, (de stroked)
2.2L 92mm stroke in a 4G63 block, (stroker)
2.3L 100 mm stroke in a 4G63 block, (stroker)
2.4L the stock stroke (100mm) in the 4G64 block

The DSM tuners are never satisfied so more set-ups are always being built (such as the 2.6L) but the names above are in general use.

Back on topic.

The 2.2L is a good compromise between the stock 2.0L and the 2.3L stroker. Any cam in the 2.2L will perform as a less aggressive cam in a stock engine and more aggressive than if installed in a 2.3L stroker.

 

[twicks69]

With the increase in displacement, you will need to be injesting a bit more air on the intake side, and will easily overrun a 264 intake cam.

I would look into a 272/272 setup for this car. It would be a very nice powerband and will be extrememly streetable.

I had 272/272's in my 2.0L to 550whp range, and when I did the changeover to my 2.3L, they did put down a healthy 740awhp/696tq. Spoolup was around 4100rpms, with peak torque at 5200rpm and carried to 7400rpm in a steady smooth decline. Horsepower peaked at 5500rpm and carried to 6500rpm before starting its decline to 650awhp by 7800rpm. These cams are very nice in 4G63's with a larger displacement and have a strong powerband from 4100-7800rpm on a large turbo.

I still recommend the purchase of a decent set of valve springs and retainers, and a set of stainless steel valves in the future, but you can run 272/272 cams on a stock head all day long. Just keep it below 8000rpm. If possible, I would have your machinist check the spring rate on your current stock valve springs to make sure they are still usable. If they are varying in spring rates or have low rates (less than 50# at 39.6mm), toss them and pick up a set of Supertech's or Crower springs with titanium retainers. It will be worth it to keep your valvetrain safe and happy.

By the way, what turbo are you going to be running on this setup?

 

[Slippi84]

Delta448 posted this and has proven to be VERY helpful with all the "2.2" builds going on or interest in them.

Using a 88mm OEM 2L crank, it would be impossible to bore either the 2L or 2.4L blocks enough to achieve 2.18L, you must use a bigger stroke. The practical limit in bore size is 88mm, or 0.060" overbore for a 2.4L(very risky and usually only done on 2.4L blocks).

The formula for displacement is 3.1415 * (bore/2)^2 * stroke * number of cylinders.

Using an 88mm (stock 2.0L) crankshaft:
85mm bore = 1997cc
85.5mm bore = 2021
86mm bore = 2045
86.5mm bore = 2068
87mm bore = 2092
87.5mm bore = 2116
88mm bore = 2141
Rod Ratios: stock piston and 150mm rod = 1.70
stroker piston and 156mm rod = 1.77
stroker piston, 2.4 block, 162mm rod = 1.84


For a 92mm Magnus crankshaft:
85mm bore = 2088cc
85.5mm bore = 2113
86mm bore = 2138
86.5mm bore = 2163
87mm bore = 2188
87.5mm bore = 2213
88mm bore = 2238
Rod Ratios: stock piston, 148mm rod = 1.61
stroker piston, 154mm rod = 1.67
stroker piston, 2.4 block, 160mm rod = 1.74


For a 94mm Eagle crankshaft:
85mm bore = 2134cc
85.5mm bore = 2159
86mm bore = 2184
86.5mm bore = 2209
87mm bore = 2235
87.5mm bore = 2261
88mm bore = 2287
Rod Ratios: stock piston, 147mm rod = 1.56
stroker piston, 153mm rod = 1.63
stroker piston, 2.4 block, 159mm rod = 1.69


For a 97mm Crower crankshaft:
85mm bore = 2202cc
85.5mm bore = 2228
86mm bore = 2254
86.5mm bore = 2280
87mm bore = 2306
87.5mm bore = 2333
88mm bore = 2360
Rod Ratios: stock piston, 145.5mm rod = 1.5
stroker piston, 151.5mm rod = 1.56
stroker piston, 2.4 block, 157.5mm rod = 1.62


For a 100mm (stock 2.4L) crankshaft:
85mm bore = 2270cc
85.5mm bore = 2296
86mm bore = 2323
86.5mm bore = 2350
87mm bore = 2378
87.5mm bore = 2405
88mm bore = 2433
Rod Ratios: stock pistons, 144mm rod = 1.44
stroker pistons, 150mm rod = 1.50
stroker pistons, 2.4 block, 156mm rod = 1.56


For a 102mm Crower crankshaft:
85mm bore = 2315cc
85.5mm bore = 2342
86mm bore = 2370
86.5mm bore = 2397
87mm bore = 2425
87.5mm bore = 2453
88mm bore = 2481
Rod Ratios: stock piston, 143mm rod = 1.40
stroker piston, 149mm rod = 1.46
stroker piston, 2.4 block, 155mm rod = 1.52


For a 106mm Crower crankshaft:
Crower states the 106mm crank must be used in a 2.4L block, stock 2.4L bore is 86.5mm.
85mm bore = n/a
85.5mm bore = n/a
86mm bore = n/a
86.5mm bore = 2491cc
87mm bore = 2520
87.5mm bore = 2549
88mm bore = 2579
Rod Ratios: stock piston, 2.4 block, 147mm rod = 1.39
stroker piston, 2.4 block, 153mm rod = 1.44

These are all of the crankshaft stroke lengths I have ever heard of anyone actually using. There are probably some other custom length ones out there (Japanese made), but most of those are too pricey and unproven. If I've forgotten any, I'll edit this post with the displacements as I'm made aware of them.

edit: Obviously a stock piston in a 2.4 block will use the same rod length as a stroker piston in a 2.0 block, and have the same resulting rod ratio, so I did not post those because of redundancy. These rod ratios are based on only two piston pin locations, the stock piston's pin location and the stroker piston's 6mm shorter height. There are other possibilities if the pin location of the piston used is not either of these two.

 

[JayRolla]

I agree with Twicks that 272's should do you fine. Like he said stock valvetrain is ok if staying under 8000rpms. I would upgrade valvetrain to be safe and allow higher reving.

 

[GUTSI]

With the increase in displacement, you will need to be injesting a bit more air on the intake side, and will easily overrun a 264 intake cam.

I would look into a 272/272 setup for this car. It would be a very nice powerband and will be extrememly streetable.

I had 272/272's in my 2.0L to 550whp range, and when I did the changeover to my 2.3L, they did put down a healthy 740awhp/696tq. Spoolup was around 4100rpms, with peak torque at 5200rpm and carried to 7400rpm in a steady smooth decline. Horsepower peaked at 5500rpm and carried to 6500rpm before starting its decline to 650awhp by 7800rpm. These cams are very nice in 4G63's with a larger displacement and have a strong powerband from 4100-7800rpm on a large turbo.

I still recommend the purchase of a decent set of valve springs and retainers, and a set of stainless steel valves in the future, but you can run 272/272 cams on a stock head all day long. Just keep it below 8000rpm. If possible, I would have your machinist check the spring rate on your current stock valve springs to make sure they are still usable. If they are varying in spring rates or have low rates (less than 50# at 39.6mm), toss them and pick up a set of Supertech's or Crower springs with titanium retainers. It will be worth it to keep your valvetrain safe and happy.

By the way, what turbo are you going to be running on this setup?

Well for now its the EVO 16G. Hoping to break 11's with it, then I'll upgrade to something more serious!
You're right, I dont plan to rev past 7500 anyway (stock head). From what I was told, spring rates are fine. In the near future, something like a stage 3 head is in the works. Its at that time that I'll address everything head related....for now Im focusing on a bullet-proof bottom end.
The only reason the cams are in is because I've had em for a while, so figured I'd throw em in while they were building the block. I didnt anticipate a stroker, otherwise I would've gone for a pair of 272's.
Im sort of in limbo ### the cams are still brand new (motor's still on crate).

Basically got 2 options: pick up a 272 intake cam, and sell the 264... OR... keep what I have, and I was thinking of cam gears and degreeing overlap. But Im not sure if thats a viable alternative, as it still doesnt change duration and lift.

 

[GUTSI]

Oh ok so your building a 2.1 stroker setup. Your title is misleading but I understand what your saying. Everything in the thread I posted is still valid and relates to yoru situation and build.

Noooo...from my understanding its a 2.2 stroker. From what I was told, the Magnus 2.2 is truly a 2.156 something. I guess because the cc's cross that 2.1 and a half threshold, its called a 2.2.

I can see why from the figures you posted earlier, why you'd say its a 2.1.....so....just to clarfiy everything, I'm actually seeing Marco a little later this evening anyway; I'll get definitive numbers in terms of what my final bore size is, and I know Im using 156mm rods and 92mm crank. Just gotta find out the final bore size

Stay tuned...

 

[GUTSI]

Oh ok so your building a 2.1 stroker setup. Your title is misleading but I understand what your saying. Everything in the thread I posted is still valid and relates to yoru situation and build.

86.1mm bore. So technically bigger than a 2.1, but technically smaller than a 2.2, so technically my title should've read "cams for a 2.1 1/2 stroker"

 

[Slippi84]

86.1mm bore. So technically bigger than a 2.1, but technically smaller than a 2.2, so technically my title should've read "cams for a 2.1 1/2 stroker"

Where you plan on buying 86.1 stroker pistons from? Unless you already planned on getting custom made pistons. By the way 86.5 which is what I thought you meant is over .060 over meaning you would be pushing the limit and if anything goes wrong you would need pretty much a new block.

 

[GUTSI]

They're already in, motor's assembled, and yeah, custom Ross pistons. Thats why I had to wait almost 9 weeks for em.

We done?

 

[BoostFrenzy]

Where you plan on buying 86.1 stroker pistons from? Unless you already planned on getting custom made pistons.

Magnus Rotating Assemblies

GUTSI, I have been looking a lot into a 2.3 7-bolt setup and consensus with those is 272's for great street ability and track duty. Now I ran into a post about a Magnus 2.2 FS on the link forums and was GREATLY intrigued by what Magnus says it can do. So if it was my decision, I would toss the 264 and get the other 272. The only reason to do a 264 is for TQ on the bottom end, but you now have a stroker setup so there is no need to retain it. So my vote goes to the straight 272's along with a least a nice set of valve springs and retainers to keep the valves in check. I also vote for you to do an IMMENSE write up on your experiences and initial thought of the Magnus 2.2 kit .