i have a 2001 z24 2.4 and i found a motor for do a forged piston,etc,etc,etc but its a 96... its good or ??
i think b4 99 the 2.4 has an egr.. and our 01's dont
correct me if im wrong.. but you can use it if you block the egr? idk
"Z24 Dustbunny"
knock sensor mounting is also different between the 96-99.5 and 99.5-02 2.4L
it will work. you may have to change some things, (EGR, knock sensor) but you can use it.
Chris
'02 Z-24 Supercharged
13.7 @102.45 MPH Third Place, 2007 GMSC Bash SOLD AS OF 01MAR08
to not worry about the egr whatsoever just swap over your exhuast mani and gasket.
ok the 96 is you weaker than the 2001??? It has defects that the 2001 do not have???? i"m sorry if my english is not very good....
No, there are no weakness differences. The later 99s through the 02 2.4s had a slightly higher compression from the factory. 9.7:1 compared to the older 2.4s 9.5:1. but that does not matter if you are building the hell out of it anyways.
who said anything about the 96 motor being weaker? just some differences is all.
this whole EGR thing is a emissions thing i believe
Im a Xbox 360 fanboy...and damn proud of it!!
he was asking if it was weaker.
-
"Youth in Asia"...I don't see anything wrong with that.
kflo wrote:No, there are no weakness differences. The later 99s through the 02 2.4s had a slightly higher compression from the factory. 9.7:1 compared to the older 2.4s 9.5:1. but that does not matter if you are building the hell out of it anyways.
Can someone show me actual proof of this.
All of the GM literature that was available to me while working in GM dealers has shown the CR to be the exact same for all rears of the 2.4L. Based on the way that my 98 drives compared to how my 00 and 02 did when stock I would have to dissagree with the supposed increase in CR.
mitdr774 wrote:kflo wrote:No, there are no weakness differences. The later 99s through the 02 2.4s had a slightly higher compression from the factory. 9.7:1 compared to the older 2.4s 9.5:1. but that does not matter if you are building the hell out of it anyways.
Can someone show me actual proof of this.
All of the GM literature that was available to me while working in GM dealers has shown the CR to be the exact same for all rears of the 2.4L. Based on the way that my 98 drives compared to how my 00 and 02 did when stock I would have to dissagree with the supposed increase in CR.
trust me sir. ive SEEN both years' pistons enough times to know.
96-99.5 - has a TINY TINY dish in the top of the piston (right in the middle) creating 9.5:1
99.5-02 - DOES NOT have this dish, their completly flat on the top creating 9.7:1
I can vouch for the 99 pistons being flat, after I popped my first engine I decided to see what its guts looked like.
mitdr774 wrote:kflo wrote:No, there are no weakness differences. The later 99s through the 02 2.4s had a slightly higher compression from the factory. 9.7:1 compared to the older 2.4s 9.5:1. but that does not matter if you are building the hell out of it anyways.
Can someone show me actual proof of this.
All of the GM literature that was available to me while working in GM dealers has shown the CR to be the exact same for all rears of the 2.4L. Based on the way that my 98 drives compared to how my 00 and 02 did when stock I would have to dissagree with the supposed increase in CR.
Do not question this info. This site has more correct info than most GM techs.
FU Tuning
I also have a '96 ld9 and at first glance the pistons do in fact look "flat topped" but take another look closer with a machinist straight edge and u will notice a slight cupping in the top of the piston. small, very small but noticeable with a couple feeler gauges stacked up. just what i happened to notice during my build...
This dish does not necicarily mean that there is a diff. in CR. I will still trust all of my GM suppied info over interweb supplied info untill I have seen actual proof. 96-99.5 also have a diff. head than 99.5-02. A small change in the chamber design would affect CR just as much as a small change in the piston. So the piston may be diff. but the same is also be true for the head.
mitdr774 wrote:This dish does not necicarily mean that there is a diff. in CR. I will still trust all of my GM suppied info over interweb supplied info untill I have seen actual proof. 96-99.5 also have a diff. head than 99.5-02. A small change in the chamber design would affect CR just as much as a small change in the piston. So the piston may be diff. but the same is also be true for the head.
wtf is ur deal? your going to trust GM over us? gm does weird things to keep insurance companys at bay. they didnt want ppl knowning of the higher compression and such so they could keep the same 150hp rating. they did it in the 70's with muscle cars all the time. hint hint 302 z28 camaro. in ALL reality the 00-02 2.4's probly have a tad bit more hp than the older ones. even though the 99.5-02 intake manifold's have a little 'obstruction' tab at the TB flange inside the plenum that the 96-99.5 do not have.
IVE SEEN IT WITH MY OWN EYES AND SO HAVE HUNDREDS OF OTHERS ON HERE. the pistons are different.
to my knowledge from seeing several of them, the heads from 96-02 are all exactly the same. they ALL have the channel for the egr, and they ALL have the exact same ports/combustion chambers.
Untill i see actual proof otherwise I will continue to trust GM over the people on the internet. I have seen enough 2.4Ls as well. I know that there is a difference between the 96-99.5 and 99.5-02 heads as I had both next to each other. The chambers had very noticeable differences. Did it ever occure to you that GM changed things because it would be easier and cheaper to manufacture them?
To the OP. All that I am aware of as a diff. in the blocks is in regards to the knock sensor mounting. Im sure it can be changed over to the newer style for your vehicle.
