I was wondering if anyone has swapped a 2.3 with a 2.4. I have a dead 2.3 in my 1995 sunfire gt. I have a possible line on a 2000 2.4. Will they swap out mechanically? Will the wire harness require major changes?
Will the ECU just swap out?
Thanks in advance
well...because your profile isnt filled out i dont know exactly what you have..BUT if you have manual transmission you need to forget about the 2.4 and find yourself a nice 2.3 High Output quad ...itll bolt right up,run off your stock pcm,and youll gain a good 30 hp over stock....
now,if you MUST have the 2.4 its gonna require you change the pcm and all the wiring under the hood..but at least the engine mounts are the same
if i were you i would sell the valuable parts off your dead 2.3 like the TB and intake cam and get the HO....just my .02
.....anyone else?
you can drop the 2.4 right in and GO. Kinda useless tough if you have a 5speed because you can get a 2.3 Ho.
Gilles
2.3 Ho
I find it amusing how everyone that owns a 2.3... says that doing anything that has to do with a 2.4, is useless. In contrast, most people who own a 2.4 will say the same things about a 2.3.... with the exception of wanting a few choice parts from it that happen to help uncork its restrictions. Bottom line, GM made certian changes when changing over from the 2.3 to the 2.4 for certian reasons at the time of production. Some things were good, others backfired, but in the end it went for 7yrs with no changes (except EGR)... unlike the 2.3 which made at least as many changes to all of its variations, as years it was used.
In that aspect, many people of a third party would consider the 2.4 to be the more sucessful production engine, and possibly the greater choice when considering a build up. Dispite the fact that the 2.4 uses a far more restrictive head, lower spec cams, and quite possibly the worst manifolds ever thought up by man, at the end of the day, it still performs right next to, if not in front of, some of the most advanced engines in its respective production years... specificaly the Japanese lineup... and to call it useless in any degree, is just ignorant.
Quote:
I find it amusing how everyone that owns a 2.3... says that doing anything that has to do with a 2.4, is useless. In contrast, most people who own a 2.4 will say the same things about a 2.3
we never said anything with a 2.4 was useless...but when you have a 95 jbody that allows a HO engine to be bolted in and allow you to take advantage of so much more then we think it is useless to "downgrade"
and people with 2.4 s who think 2.3 mods are useless..well..they're just ignorant..
alot of people with 2.4 cars have gone thru alot of trouble to put 2.3 HO engines in their cars...yet i cant think of many(if any) who went thru the trouble of taking out a 2.3 for a twin cam.........whats that say
scott (section8cav) wrote:Quote:
I find it amusing how everyone that owns a 2.3... says that doing anything that has to do with a 2.4, is useless. In contrast, most people who own a 2.4 will say the same things about a 2.3
we never said anything with a 2.4 was useless...but when you have a 95 jbody that allows a HO engine to be bolted in and allow you to take advantage of so much more then we think it is useless to "downgrade"
and people with 2.4 s who think 2.3 mods are useless..well..they're just ignorant..
alot of people with 2.4 cars have gone thru alot of trouble to put 2.3 HO engines in their cars...yet i cant think of many(if any) who went thru the trouble of taking out a 2.3 for a twin cam.........whats that say
It just says that the 2.3 people are looking for easy swap jobs, rather than trying to take advantage of the positive aspects of both engines...9 times out of 10, people will run towards 180hp w/o thinking about alternatives. Then again, not everyone is looking for the be all to end all engine everytime.. they just want a little extra kick... which is understandable.
The 2.4 is not a great engine compared to the 2.3. Yes it went 7 years with no change but you know what? That's because Olds worked all the parts they could on the 2.3 so Gm had nothing else to do than modify a few small things of the 2.3 and create the 2.4.
I have both engine. Yes the 2.4 is fun to drive for the low end but I would swap a 2.3 for a 2.4. Alot easier to work on a 2.3. Alot cheaper with a 2.3 too. 10$ for a damn oil filter is crazy. My ho filters cost half of the price of a 2.4 filter.
Also, 2.3 can be found EVERYWHERE. Every damn 2.4 I came across cost over 1k. I can get 2.3's for 250$. For a daily driver (IN TOWN), I would go with a 2.4. For a daily driver with almost no city driving, I'd get a 2.3. For performance, get the 2.3.
To the original poster, you'd need to run the 2.3 injectors tough. Maybe a few other sensors but it's pretty much a bolt in.
Gilles
2.3 Ho
Mfk-223 wrote:The 2.4 is not a great engine compared to the 2.3. Yes it went 7 years with no change but you know what? That's because Olds worked all the parts they could on the 2.3 so Gm had nothing else to do than modify a few small things of the 2.3 and create the 2.4.
I have both engine. Yes the 2.4 is fun to drive for the low end but I would swap a 2.3 for a 2.4. Alot easier to work on a 2.3. Alot cheaper with a 2.3 too. 10$ for a damn oil filter is crazy. My ho filters cost half of the price of a 2.4 filter.
Also, 2.3 can be found EVERYWHERE. Every damn 2.4 I came across cost over 1k. I can get 2.3's for 250$. For a daily driver (IN TOWN), I would go with a 2.4. For a daily driver with almost no city driving, I'd get a 2.3. For performance, get the 2.3.
To the original poster, you'd need to run the 2.3 injectors tough. Maybe a few other sensors but it's pretty much a bolt in.
So let me get this strait... the 2.3 is better because:
- Olds changed it so many times that GM finally dropped it and redesigned it completely.
- parts are readily availible in junkyards everywhere making them inexpensive to buy
- it uses cheap oil filters
- its supposively easier to work on
did i get that right? Its better because it was such a mechanical disaster that it was dropped, owns the GM section in junkyards everywhere, and uses cheap parts? Sounds to me that your basis for superiority... only makes it look worse.
Find for me an engine from any manufacturer that was hands down better in everyway, than the engine that replaced it in the line up.... you cant. If the new engine wasnt improved to a moderate extent, they wouldnt spend the millions of dollars it takes to create it. Dont get me wrong, there are a lot of desireable parts on the 2.3's that the 2.4 guys want and use because they are in fact better... but that doesnt mean the total package is. Everyone is going to be biased one way or another, but opinions are like @ssholes... everyone has one
Quote:
opinions are like @ssholes... everyone has one
many opinions there may be...but the facts still stand,and the facts are:
the 2.3 made more power
2.3s are cheaper,whether in parts or in whole..
alot of the parts ARE easier to work on ...i was amazed at how much easier it wasto change simple things like a thermostate
bottom line is..if alittle reliabilty is the only thing better on the 2.4 i think ill keep the 2.3 ..no one has yet to prove to me that it would be in my best interest to get a 2.4...i mean,if my 2.3 is faster and parts are cheaper to get even WHEN something brakes...what was so much better with the twin cam?i am yet to see an upside.......
honestly, I think the 2.4 is no more reliable then the 2.3 despite all these wonderful changes....look at my repair list on my 2.3's vs my 2.4's. Do you know why they replaced the 2.3? People complained it was too loud...hence the balance shafts in the 2.4. The factory design on the head gasket is better on the 2.4 vs the 2.3, but if its been changed, its just as strong. Usually we don't see too many 2.4 head gaskets go bad cuz they spun #3 instead haha. Sorry, but I think the 2.4 is junk. what was so darn faulty about the 2.3? I'll give ya factory installed head gasket design, which gm posted a service bulletin that fixed with a new tightening sequence and specs. I'll even take your word on the bad gear on the 2.3....even though us 2.4 guys pushed so hard to get a recall on the 2.4 water pump cuz thye usually go out between 70k and 90k. Anything else? those supposedly fixed problems, didn't get fixed, so why buy a more expensive improved design, if its not improved?
I'll tell you what, I went from the 2.4L test mule (95 2.3L Quad 4 Twin Cam LO) to the HO in MY Sunfire. I'll tell you this, I've ridden in 2.4L cars and raced against 2.4L cars, I wouldn't give up what I have now for ANYTHING. More power, less intenally to break, more power options, race engineered vs. whiney car owners (the whole "it makes too much noise, too much vibration" arguement), sounds meaner. WE NOW HAVE A HEADER THAT"S A REAL HEADER!!!, M90 supercharger setup (and it can take all of it), t03/t04 is a small turbo on the Quad.
I keep my oil fresh, and dont let the car sit in traffic, the quad has been good to me for the first 20-30K miles, it's kinda nice to hang with GTI 1.8t's, in a pretty much stock N/A motor.
DTP can attest, I love the Quad.
