now what makes the 2.4 eco a 2.4 just stroke or bore and stroke?
I have this crazy idea to slap a 2.2 ecotec head onto a 2.4 ecotec block but I have questions
if I were to order rods for the 2,4 do I need to order them specifically for the 2.4 or does the crank in the 2.4 make it the 2.4?
just some things I was thinking
LE61T PTE6262 Powered 
The crank and the rods both have different part numbers from the 2.2 to the 2.4. Did you need anything else ?
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
no... I would use a stock crank and get eagle 2.4 rods...
home made stroker kit :p
LE61T PTE6262 Powered
ever hear of putting a b series head on a d series motor? if not its roughly the same as what your asking...
i dont see a problem with your idea. id have to say ive thought the same thing. wait for some young idiots to total their solstices and ss cobalts with a 2.4 and grab one.
Sven you totally quarterloafed your computer..
WHILE YOUR @ IT THROW ON A 2.0 HEAD CAUSE IT FLOWS THE BEST
*************Yea i spell liek wrong get over it*****************
** If i write in caps its cause im @ work and i can only write in caps cause the keyboard is a retarded CAPS only keyboard.**
the 2.4 has forged rods already , but the eagle are better
the rods dont change engine size , the bore and stroke do
Jrobz23 wrote:ever hear of putting a b series head on a d series motor? if not its roughly the same as what your asking...
I hope your kidding. You can NOT put a B-series head on a D-series motor. nothing is the same.
i was actually talkin about this with my friend about two weeks ago, but it wasnt like we really put much thought into it, just came up as a "what if". would be nice to make a ecotec stroker
Sleepin wrote:Jrobz23 wrote:ever hear of putting a b series head on a d series motor? if not its roughly the same as what your asking...
I hope your kidding. You can NOT put a B-series head on a D-series motor. nothing is the same.
ahahahha, sorry- that one made me laugh
Blew it up
Sleepin wrote:Jrobz23 wrote:ever hear of putting a b series head on a d series motor? if not its roughly the same as what your asking...
I hope your kidding. You can NOT put a B-series head on a D-series motor. nothing is the same.
i think he meant the ls v-tec motor, gotta admit those things move a bit! i had the idea of a 24 eco head on a 22 eco block, but was told it wouldnt work. i think it would though, just some wiring needed for the vvt
i dont know I didnt see anything but maybe I missed it
LE61T PTE6262 Powered
[quote=97cavie24ls(JDM&00s/c sedans™)]the 2.4 has forged rods already , but the eagle are better
the rods dont change engine size , the bore and stroke do
forged as in?
whats the rating on the rods?
LE61T PTE6262 Powered
Quote:
ever hear of putting a b series head on a d series motor? if not its roughly the same as what your asking...
that cant be done.... its not possible. u can put a vtec head on a non vtec block if they are the same.. sohc on sohc. or dohc on dohc. cant switch in between.
[quote=97cavie24ls(JDM&00s/c sedans™)]the rods dont change engine size , the bore and stroke doBut, when you change the stroke length, you need to shorten the rods. This is of course assuming you are using an identical block height and want to maintain the same quench distance...
fortune cookie say:
better a delay than a disaster.
yeah guys you knew what i was sayin.. im not hip to the honda lingo..
Sven you totally quarterloafed your computer..
actually phil, using the 2.4 bottom end would be a mixed blessing... you'd get the added displacement, which would help to spool a bigger turbo, but typically the shorter stroke/bigger bore is better. You'd have to figure out the rod/stroke ratio of the 2.4 first (which i'm too lazy to do right now). Since the 2.0 head supposedly flows better, and I assume already has cams meant for boost, and also is well documented to be tough as hell, I'd say f--- it and swap in the 2.0. When you're dealing with a high boost setup, 400cc isn't going to be worth much power, and i'm not sure the increased spool would really be worth it... when a 30 shot of nitrous would probably do just as much, if not more
Arrival Blue 04 LS Sport
Eco
Turbo
Megasquirt
'Nuff said
cool idea but mmmm if you have the money try it i guess but i would do loads of research before spending that kind of money just to *see*
*2012 mazdaspeed3*
megasquirt can handle vvt/vtec. then have a contorler for that. i want to swap in the 2.4 because of the VVT.
QBE (73H 800573D 0N3) wrote:Scarab (Jersey Jay 1.8T) wrote:actually phil, using the 2.4 bottom end would be a mixed blessing... you'd get the added displacement, which would help to spool a bigger turbo, but typically the shorter stroke/bigger bore is better. You'd have to figure out the rod/stroke ratio of the 2.4 first (which i'm too lazy to do right now). Since the 2.0 head supposedly flows better, and I assume already has cams meant for boost, and also is well documented to be tough as hell, I'd say f--- it and swap in the 2.0. When you're dealing with a high boost setup, 400cc isn't going to be worth much power, and i'm not sure the increased spool would really be worth it... when a 30 shot of nitrous would probably do just as much, if not more
I am def. going bigger not smaller... and if the motor is being built I am getting the comp cams turbo cams fo sho lol and working the head over with some amazing valvetrain
I think you missed the point i was trying to make... and that's that bigger is not always better. If going to the 2.4 block changes the rod ratio significantly, the power band is going to be drastically different and their may be several changes you have to make in order to compensate for that. You've got to remember that even a fwd on slicks, is still a fwd, and can only control so much low end power... I know you plan on making crazy power this time about, so having a good rod/stroke ratio like that of the 2.0 may actually be more beneficial then having the extra 400 cc of displacement. If you get a chance try reading up on rod/stroke ratio and its effect on engine breathing/efficiency.
Arrival Blue 04 LS Sport
Eco
Turbo
Megasquirt
'Nuff said
Scarab (Jersey Jay 1.8T) wrote:QBE (73H 800573D 0N3) wrote:Scarab (Jersey Jay 1.8T) wrote:actually phil, using the 2.4 bottom end would be a mixed blessing... you'd get the added displacement, which would help to spool a bigger turbo, but typically the shorter stroke/bigger bore is better. You'd have to figure out the rod/stroke ratio of the 2.4 first (which i'm too lazy to do right now). Since the 2.0 head supposedly flows better, and I assume already has cams meant for boost, and also is well documented to be tough as hell, I'd say f--- it and swap in the 2.0. When you're dealing with a high boost setup, 400cc isn't going to be worth much power, and i'm not sure the increased spool would really be worth it... when a 30 shot of nitrous would probably do just as much, if not more
I am def. going bigger not smaller... and if the motor is being built I am getting the comp cams turbo cams fo sho lol and working the head over with some amazing valvetrain
I think you missed the point i was trying to make... and that's that bigger is not always better. If going to the 2.4 block changes the rod ratio significantly, the power band is going to be drastically different and their may be several changes you have to make in order to compensate for that. You've got to remember that even a fwd on slicks, is still a fwd, and can only control so much low end power... I know you plan on making crazy power this time about, so having a good rod/stroke ratio like that of the 2.0 may actually be more beneficial then having the extra 400 cc of displacement. If you get a chance try reading up on rod/stroke ratio and its effect on engine breathing/efficiency.
Ok... sounds like some good info...
if I go the route of a 2.0 I wont redline less then 7500
probly shoot for 8000 rpms
LE61T PTE6262 Powered
the only way a 2.0 is better than a 2.4 is if you could spin it over our redline
the 2.0 and the 2.2 both redline at 6450 , and the 2.4 is around 6800
the 2.4 uses the same cams(as far as ive read) as the 2.2 , it just has the ability to change the cam timing for more low end or top end
the 2.4 uses forged rods , similar to the 2.0
and alot of the guys with stroker motors , use the longer rods over shorter rods
RAKSJ04 wrote:megasquirt can handle vvt/vtec. then have a contorler for that. i want to swap in the 2.4 because of the VVT.
i like that idea more than using the stock 2.4 vvt controls. i bet you can tune it to a more agressive profile that way and take more advantage of it, boost or not..
i wonder if there are "black boxes" out there for just such a purpose if you wanna control just vvt with it and have your 2.2 pcm with reflash or HPT handle the rest. just some ideas for ya. guys from the sound of it you are basically (in concept) building the new 2.0T VVT engine (260 BHP). 2.0 bottom plus 2.4 top. should make for a sick cav..
Sven you totally quarterloafed your computer..
