2.4 vs 2.3

[rdeis]

Hello all, hopefully this is the right place (was correctly chastized before, sorry..)

Given that:
1> The rod ratio situation is the same on a 4g64/1G head hybrid as a 4g63 w/64 crank hybrid
2> A 4G63 can be overbored to match the 64 for the extra .1L displacement
3> Using the 64 block requires different timing belt components (headache!)

Why would I choose the 64 block instead of just using the 64 crank in my 63 block?

Both options require a little extra machine work on the block, but it seems like the extra hassel of adapting to the new block doesn't bring any benefit over just using the crank unless I were to go with long rods?

[QuasiMondo]

Depends on cost, really. For one thing, by using the 64 block, you won't have to pay for pistons that have the wrist pin height raised to accomodate the 63 block (or use shorter connecting rods if you stay with stock pistons). The lowest priced stroker kit I've seen was a $1500 kit from SBR. I'm sure you can go less if you get the parts on your own, but since either the pistons or rods have to be special ordered, you're going to pay $$$. In the end, since you can use stock 64 internals throughout, it's a bit more cost effective to start with a 64 block.

That is of course, unless you're going with forged internals all the way, in that case, there reallly isn't a reason to use a 64 block.

[rdeis]

In the end, since you can use stock 64 internals throughout, it's a bit more cost effective to start with a 64 block.

That is of course, unless you're going with forged internals all the way, in that case, there reallly isn't a reason to use a 64 block.

So, 64 is cheaper for internal parts, but 63 doesn't require new external parts.

That's sort of what I was concluding- thanks!

[QuasiMondo]

So, 64 is cheaper for internal parts, but 63 doesn't require new external parts.

That's sort of what I was concluding- thanks!

The 63 does require new parts. Because of the longer crank, if you use the stock pistons and rods, the tops of the pistons will sit above the deck at TDC. You would either have to get new pistons that have the wrist pin raised 6mm or connecting rods that are 6mm shorter than stock. 64 requires no new internals.

Sorry if I didn't communicate that effectively.

[rdeis]

The 63 does require new parts.

Right- but only internals (rods, pistons) 64 requres new external parts (timing belt related stuff) and the internal parts are (sort of) optional. Yes?

[pUtInExIm]

Even if you used a 4G64 you would still want to install forged pistons, because the stocks are nothing like 4G63T piston.

[SlowboyNRS]

You said there would be extra machine work before, not sure if you included to this the clearancing of the 63 block at the bottom of the bores and the main caps where the rod ends hit. Both are great choices.

Have you considered a 4G64 with a 4G63 crank? Badass 2.1L setup that you can rev to the moon.

Nate
SBR

[DR.Spock]

Have you considered a 4G64 with a 4G63 crank? Badass 2.1L setup that you can rev to the moon.


yes but most stock trannies will not shift at high RPM's. gotta most likely give SHEP a call and have him hook your tranny up for some high RPM shifting

[SlowboyNRS]

yes but most stock trannies will not shift at high RPM's. gotta most likely give SHEP a call and have him hook your tranny up for some high RPM shifting

Yes, but who wouldn't when going fast ;)

Your right, you will definetly need a good tranny or dogbox to shift at 10k+.

Nate
SBR

[DR.Spock]

Your right, you will definetly need a good tranny or dogbox to shift at 10k+.

i bet shifting and hearing the motor scream at those RPM's would be so awesome though :eek:

[SlowboyNRS]

i bet shifting and hearing the motor scream at those RPM's would be so awesome though :eek:

Yes, yes it is :D

Nate
SBR

[Asmodeus]

Post specifics.
I have extra 63, and 64 engines.
yes extra... :P
What is involved in the 2.1 exactly.
I love options. ;)
please?

[SlowboyNRS]

Post specifics.
I have extra 63, and 64 engines.
yes extra... :P
What is involved in the 2.1 exactly.
I love options. ;)
please?

Fairly simply setup. We use a 4G64 block, 4G63 crank, custom rod, and a custom Ross piston. Although they are custom parts, pricing isan't outrageous. All this equals a 2.14L motor that can spin to 11K rpms. If you get shep to build you a good double syncro tranny, or you get a dogbox, this is one hell of a shortblock.

Nate
SBR

[DR.Spock]

you would also need to upgrade your valve springs and retainers for better realiability

[Asmodeus]

I would imagine... :D
At that RPM you'd have tons of valve float without an increase in spring seat pressure.
Definately cool idea though. Due to the "retarded" rpm hit by such an engine I believe it would outweigh my miniscule budget... in reinforcement alone.

Different starting points sure effect what is viewed as easier. lol!
Since my car COMES with the 4G64 in it... it is much more beneficial to just swap the head and slap a turbo on. Atleast while I'm behind the wrench.
It does include a "wonderful" ecu swap though. :rolleyes:
Since I have a few of each I believe I will leave the stock pistons at first, and run low boost. It is my understanding that while shitty, they will still take 8-10psi. Assuming your tuned well.

2nd time I'll pull the pistons, or when I break it. :P

*Yeah Nate, you can come laugh at me at the track...
I wanna do a prelim run with just the head swap,
then one with the turbo, so it should be plenty slow and humorous.
At first... it IS a Galant. :rolleyes:

[DJpowerHaus]

I'd love to try that 2.1 destroker setup with my RX7 transmission setup. It sounds like it would be a match made in heaven. I already have the 2.4L motor built. Maybe the backup motor can be built as a destroker.

[drcustom]

has anyone here actually put together the 2.14l? That sounds like a good deal, do you have to use a specific 64 block?

[T-double]

yes I would think that you would have to use a 2.4 block b/c of the deck..... I guess the whole concept is to use a 2.4 block and 2.0 crank and custom rods, but I guess the 2.0 crank would be lighter and would rev higher than the 2.4 crank and I guess you need to also calculate the weight of the rods in comparison of the stock 2.4 set up. It sounds good, but is it a long term engine????? So in theroy it will be a 2.4 with 2.0 crank and custom rods I just want to see one in action....

[Spyder4G64T]

<sigh>

2 year old thread.

[drcustom]

yes I would think that you would have to use a 2.4 block b/c of the deck..... I guess the whole concept is to use a 2.4 block and 2.0 crank and custom rods, but I guess the 2.0 crank would be lighter and would rev higher than the 2.4 crank and I guess you need to also calculate the weight of the rods in comparison of the stock 2.4 set up. It sounds good, but is it a long term engine????? So in theroy it will be a 2.4 with 2.0 crank and custom rods I just want to see one in action....

In the last few years, I've learned a bit. I still have yet to see one personally, but they're out there.

The idea is that with 6mm longer rods you have the 2.0 internals...meaning you get a rod/stroke ratio better suited for higher rpms. People call these the long rod 4g63, and it's a 2.1 litre. The extra weight is offset by the increased ratio. You end up with an engine that is actually more reliable and lasts longer because it puts less stress on ALL of the internals, and the block. It's claimed that they'll rev over 10k rpms. A stroker gives you more power because it puts more forces on the crank sooner, but it also stresses everything out, and has a really low rod to stroke ratio.