help me build my 2.4L!

[dnhieu]

okay so i have been doing tons of reading on the 2.4L and am curious if i could get some inputs on selecting the right parts to get a super fun torque monster. im really not looking for a set number but is 400hp 450tq possible? would a 3065 give me a pretty fast spool up and produce similar numbers on 93 octane alone? what cams is everyone running with the 2.4? i was thinking about leaving the 1g head stock and running a stock intake manifold to aid with spool up and torque (i just remember with my last 1g with ported heads,bc 280, and hx40 taking FOREVER to spool) would this be a good idea or too restrictive for the 2.4?

any setup advice leaning towards producing good torque numbers would be appreciated.

David

 

[yepes281]

I know viperlp is running a smim and said he would have ran a cyclone if he could do it over again. And with larger cams you move the power band up higher, so you not going to get as much low end torque. So 264/272 or 272/272 sound like the best cams to go with, when it comes to stroking. Also since with a stroker your limited to how high you can rev, moving the power band higher with bigger cams would be a bad idea because your not going to be using the cams to their potential.

 

[dnhieu]

I know viperlp is running a smim and said he would have ran a cyclone if he could do it over again. And with larger cams you move the power band up higher, so you not going to get as much low end torque. So 264/272 or 272/272 sound like the best cams to go with, when it comes to stroking. Also since with a stroker your limited to how high you can rev, moving the power band higher with bigger cams would be a bad idea because your not going to be using the cams to their potential.

okay you have obviously never built a 2.4 from all my reading i have been doing over the last 4 days. from my understanding the 2.4 needs bigger cams to seem like 272 type cam on a 2.0. im really considering the kelford 272, fp3 or fp3x cam. just want some inputs as to where it actually puts the power band.

 

[yepes281]

okay you have obviously never built a 2.4 from all my reading i have been doing over the last 4 days. from my understanding the 2.4 needs bigger cams to seem like 272 type cam on a 2.0. im really considering the kelford 272, fp3 or fp3x cam. just want some inputs as to where it actually puts the power band.

Actually im in the precess of building it right now. And wow 4 days of reading, your an expert, i researched for months so I guess I must be Einstein. You asked for input so i gave it to you. The bigger the cams the more up top power your going to have, simple as that, you said you want a "super fun torque monster" by saying that i figured you want more low end torque, which is was a 272/272 combo is going to give you.

ECMTuning, Inc. and download ecmlink v3... Its free software and you can view logs.

Yes the cams and the SMIM caused me to loose alittle torque down low. But i make it up once spool hits. My Airflow continues to rise. This car was designed for the street and sometimes I wish I would have gotten a evo3 IM but I could pass up the deal on the magnus. I also wish I would have went with the 272s but I do like the 275s.

Ill be revving to atleast 7500. I might try 8k.. The head will easily take it. manley valvetrain(titanium retainers)

 

[dnhieu]

Actually im in the precess of building it right now. And wow 4 days of reading, your an expert, i researched for months so I guess I must be Einstein. You asked for input so i gave it to you. The bigger the cams the more up top power your going to have, simple as that, you said you want a "super fun torque monster" by saying that i figured you want more low end torque, which is was a 272/272 combo is going to give you.

what motor is that quote for??? i assume a 2.0....

i dont want anymore of your opinion and request that you just do more reading. im trying to build a motor where all the parts work. everyone says that the strokers require a larger cam. the kelfords are alot larger then your average 272 cam. everyone is suggesting a 280....

 

[yepes281]

what motor is that quote for??? i assume a 2.0....

i dont want anymore of your opinion and request that you just do more reading. im trying to build a motor where all the parts work. everyone says that the strokers require a larger cam. the kelfords are alot larger then your average 272 cam. everyone is suggesting a 280....

The quotes for a 2.3l, bore .020 over, 9:1 comp.
And i wasnt giving opinion, i backed it up from a quote from and actual stroker motor.
As much as i wanted a bigger cam, i went with the 272s because everything i read pointed towards them being a better setup. I researched as much as i could before i dove in to a stroker build. If you could at least explain how a bigger cam does better with a 2.4l please do it, as i really would like to know.
I know that strokers are more tolerent of bigger cams, and daily driving wont be as harsh with a more aggressive cam, but performance wise i havent really heard much. Not saying its better or worse, just saying i havent heard anything really.
Its hard getting input on stroker builds because not alot of people have done them, so the information isnt really out there.

 

[dnhieu]

http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/cylinder-head-short-block/166440-cams-2-4l-stroked-1g.html

post 5 and 14

http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/stroker-tech/263324-2-4l-cam-choices.html
whole post

http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/cylinder-head-short-block/183700-fp2-vs-fp3-back-back.html

dyno results.

can someone with a 2.4l please chime in. im really trying to avoid the whole trial and error method of doing this...

 

[yepes281]

There were no posts comparing the 272s to the fp3s. Although the 272s look to have a small advantage over fp3s in low end power, but the fp3s seems to quickly make up for that power through the rest of the power band. I dont think theres a right or wrong cam, i think it just depends where you want your power.
Also i think 280s would be right in between 272s and fp3s, giving a little more torque and also increasing top end power.


Is there anyone that has experience with this?

 

[dnhieu]

There were no posts comparing the 272s to the fp3s. Although the 272s look to have a small advantage over fp3s in low end power, but the fp3s seems to quickly make up for that power through the rest of the power band. I dont think theres a right or wrong cam, i think it just depends where you want your power.
Also i think 280s would be right in between 272s and fp3s, giving a little more torque and also increasing top end power.


Is there anyone that has experience with this?

that was a huge increase in power with the fp2 and 3. i just hate that it changed the power band so much.

i want a huge amounts of low end quick boost power. im just afraid i can produce the quick spool high torque numbers i want with the 3065 i have...

i really just want to know what kind of cam/turbo setups people are running for a very fun street car...

 

[dnhieu]

bump!

 

[shleppy]

If your only looking for around 400whp, quick spool and 450wtq then a ballbearing 50trim or gt3071r would suit way better then a 3065. Heck, with only a 2.3, a gt3076r and a few huge cracks in my intercooler I still made 425/425 to the tire at 4600. We couldnt get more out of it at the time due to the massive splitting of my intercooler on the dyno. I would bet large sums of money that after we welded the intercooler I picked up a bunch of low end tq and passed that 425 number-btw this was done with the 280 cams. I also made 200/200 at 3000r rpms.