DSMTalk Forums: Mitsubishi Eclipse, Plymouth Laser, and Eagle Talon Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi people

Well, it had to happen... I nuked the bottom end of my motor. From the 30 second lookover I'd say I lost a rod and the accompanying piston along with putting a hole through the block.

For the rebuild I want to build up the short block so I don't have to deal with those piss weak 2G rods. While I'm at it, I'm seriously considering a stroker setup (2.3ltr) but know very little about which company does these best and how much it would cost. Does anybody have any suggestions as to who I should consider doing this through? Also, are there any reasons why I shouldn't do this? I think ForceFED suggested Buschur does these?

Just FYI, my car is a daily driver if that matters any and whether or not I do a stroker motor I would still build up the bottom end with forged pistons and rods.

Thanx plenty in advance for any help.


------------------
Cya O!
SPOOLIN!

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Thanx for the input, guys.

From what I've read, Forced Performance (Jeff RIP) suggested that a 2.3ltr would be the way to go as you can stick with the 2.0ltr block and not have the complications that stroking to 2.4ltr would have. I think, however, a new steel crank is in order then. Right?


------------------
Cya O!
SPOOLIN!

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
557 Posts
Yes do the stroker motor. I've heard gobs of low end and midrange torque. I personally don't have any experience with it, but how could .3 more liters of displacement hurt anything. Theoretically a 2.3 motor should beat a 2.0 motor with equal mods and driver.
I say go for it!!!!

Jesse
99 GSX 2.0 :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
482 Posts
Worse top-end tho right??? gsxalex was tellin me about that. Not terrible top end... but worse, I guess that's the tradeback.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
17,457 Posts
I was under the impression that the strokers werent used all that often because the low end torque you get with it ends up destroying your drivetrain.

------------------
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
I'm in the process of putting a stroker motor in my car now. Hopefully it will be done on the next week or two, then I'll throw up the dyno sheets. Since you are 2g it would involve swapping a 1g block into your car. You have to use a 90-92 block for the stroker motor because the journal sizes are larger in these years. Which is a requirement to use the 2.4L crank in the 4g63. THere are 2 ways to do the swap. Modify your 2g Front Cover and 1g block so the oil passages line up (cheezy way to do it IMO) or you can make new motor mounts. I'm going with new motor mounts that way it will be easier to swap motors in the future....to my knowledge no one has taken this route yet. I figured the motor would be great on the street due to the extra displacement and gobs more of low end torque. Since it will be my weekend street toy I figured this would be best. You can't spin this motor to 9k like a 2.0L because of the extra stroke the motor has. I think my redline is going to be right around 8k. Dyno sheets to come soon. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
Yes you have to get a new crank. That's the whole point to a stroker motor...adding displacement while retaining the original block. I believe the crank originally comes from some dodge mini-van or something. But to use this crank you need a 90-92 block.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
729 Posts
forcefed,
I cant imagine how you would get a higher redline and be able to spin it faster with a stroker. At an equal rpm the pistons would be moving even faster that stock and this would in turn put more strain on the rods and pistons thus lowering the max "safe" rpm limit.

Also, since the pistons are moving faster wouldn't the powerband be shifted down in the rpm range? In otherwords, would't you lose high rpm hp?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
Why do you have a hard time believeing you can't spin this motor higher than stock redline? 2.0 are spinning to 10k these days. I won't be able to spin it quite that high (not yet anyway), but I'll still spin it higher than stock.

I don't know if I'm going to lose high rpm HP. My last experience w/ a 383 stroker would say no but it does make some sense. I do know that torque this motor puts out is unreal. Only the dyno sheets will tell.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
729 Posts
forcefed,
don't get me wrong here...
I am sure that motor will WAY outperform any built 2.0, but what i am saying is that it will be a differant beast altogether.

The low-end torque will more than compensate for any high-end losses. And perhaps it will still outperform a 2.0 for high-end hp, but i really think that by then it would be out of its powerband. Just think about how a stroker crank would make the piston travel farther between TDC and BDC per rotation. That means that it has to travel faster and there would be greater strain on the pistons and especially the rods per given rpm.

I am not speaking from experience, just what my logic is telling me.

Any idea what sakura runs for high rpm? Granted it is an all-together differant motor and all, but...

And i suppose the limiting factor on the 9-10k motors is probably the valves/springs, not the crowers... Have you heard of any dsms throwing a crower?

i dunno, this is just how i thought it all worked.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
The 2.3 should behave quite differently than a 2.0. For the street terror I want this car to be right now the additional torque will suit me better I hope. I don't think it will have the bite of a equally built 2.0 towrds redline but that extra low-end grunt is what I want right now.

Pistons speeds will be up quite a bit from a regular 2.0 but I think the JE/Crower combonation will be plenty good. If they can handle n2o I'm sure they'll be fine. Plus I don't plan on juicing htis motor that can wait until the next one.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top