I do not want this thread to turn in to a pissing contest between LD9 an Eco owners... i just want to hear the pros and cons of each motor from respective motors in terms as what you can do with it to make it more efficient and the reliability of the motor (or in other words Longevity after modifying) . Please back up your statements.
ECOs suck.
But seriously, ECOs are lighter and easier to work with the top end (i.e. changing out cams or the head), as well as have the full support of GM racing behind them. LD9s are decent motors, and can be great motors after they are molested with 2.3L parts. Either way, both of the motor's blocks and cranks can take one hell of a beating. Speaking of which, ECOs actually had a forged crank made for them by Eagle, whereas the LD9 did not. ECOs also have aftermarket heads available.
The main benefit of the LD9 is cost, because we take parts off of an already existing motor for performance, where something like an assembled ECO patriot stage 2 head can cost around $1300 and an 086 head (or p&p 2.4L head) with ss valves can cost less than $500 for similar (or better) air flow. The same concept can be applied to cams as well.
-
"Youth in Asia"...I don't see anything wrong with that.
The biggest point that one should consider is that the LD9 is a "dead" platform. Its an engine thats no longer made and parts will continually get more difficult to find for it. As far as what a person should consider for a swap, the Eco should win hands down. Its still supported and will continue to be into the foreseeable future. Its been around since 2000 and performance parts and build "guides" are in easy supply. I certainly wouldn't swap in an LD9 into any car that I plan to build, but since I have one already, I might as well go with it.
4cyltuner.com - Information Source For 4 Cylinder Tuners
Buy stuff from CarCustoms Ebay! Won't be disappointed!
Extreme Delusions(Speedline Z) wrote:I do not want this thread to turn in to a pissing contest between LD9 an Eco owners... i just want to hear the pros and cons of each motor from respective motors in terms as what you can do with it to make it more efficient and the reliability of the motor (or in other words Longevity after modifying) . Please back up your statements.
Why? You know well that this will turn into what you say you don't want: "a pissing contest." Hell... look at your title. All your answers can be found by searching.
Oh just so you know the "Eco" is known as L61.
>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----
the ld9 has the greatest displacemnt and more HP and torque. very stong motor. i loved my LD9. it hauled serious ass. and it has alot more power potential by doing OEM upgrades(2.3 stroker upgrade, HO metal intake manfiold, secret cams) and other simple upgrades. with those upgardes you can make the engine even more bad ass.
Working on obtainting an M-Class license... ?? Hint: 2 wheels.
so, i say the 2.4L LD9 is the king of the 4 bangers
Working on obtainting an M-Class license... ?? Hint: 2 wheels.
reference: "2.3L stroker upgrade" i meant using a 2.3L crankshaft to stroke your 2.4L LD9 to 2.6L.
Working on obtainting an M-Class license... ?? Hint: 2 wheels.
Toronto Cavalier wrote:reference: "2.3L stroker upgrade" i meant using a 2.3L crankshaft to stroke your 2.4L LD9 to 2.6L.
You have it backwards. The 2.4 crank in the 2.3 makes a 2.5L, an overbore can bring it up to 2.6L. You can't put the 2.3 crank in the 2.4.
4cyltuner.com - Information Source For 4 Cylinder Tuners
Buy stuff from CarCustoms Ebay! Won't be disappointed!
my money is on the LD9 as well...
but every time i turn around i hear "eco" this and "eco" that...
i've even heard 2200 owners say "the stock eco will stomp all over every other stock J engine"... which i know isnt true... (the 3.1 litres in Second Gen Zs were the @!#$)... but i dont think any stock J engine will stomp all over any other stock J engine (if we don't count the 2200 w/ Auto Trans)
Quote:
2nd gen 3.1's had less hp than the 2.4 (more torque though), and weighed more. My 2000 Z24 definately feels faster than my 89 Z24 3.1 did.
Very True, I own both a 93 5spd Z24 (3.1) and a 99 (2.4) 5spd Z24
1st gear in the 93 z is just a burnout anyway after 1st gear the 2.4 is quicker all the way to the governor
I love me my LD9, but the L61 is a great newer engine.
In stock form I personally believe that the L61 is stronger, especially the 02' l61. It can handle more boost, and a better beating than the LD9 can. With 100% stock top and bottom ends. Not saying the LD9 can't take a licking.
The L61 will win because, it is a newer and is a better designed engine overall. Plain and simple.
All I'm talking about is stock LD9 vs. stock L61. If either were build "correctly" they can handle a hell of a beating, and still be happy.
So either can handle and make great power. What I'm trying to say is.
Stock
L61>LD9
Modified
LD9=L61
PRND321 Till I DIE
Old Motor: 160whp & 152ft/lbs, 1/4 Mile 15.4 @88.2
M45 + LD9 + 4T40-E, GO GO GO
the way i see it the 2.4 is superior only because its a 2.4 and not a 2.2. i absolutly hate the fact that they lowered displacement, you get more torque AND hp out of a 2.4 stock for stock, but because the eco is a more reliable engine, it seems to be the hot item nowadays.
the other thing ive noticed is the eco seems to like being modded more than a ld9, dk why this is, but IMO its definatly the case they just respond easier. the thing is though, an ld9 with a 2.3 oil pump swap and some decent aftermarket parts could do well pull for pull against an eco in terms of reliability. the stock 2.4 oiling system is a joke, most of us have had to see this first hand and are not happy about it, but on the other hand ive seen 2.4's running past 190,000 miles and still hurtin for a squirtn.
Stock vs. Stock, the eco wins if for no other reason than it will handle more power on stock components. Once you start modding, the margin of win gets bigger, there's more parts available, it's lighter, stronger, and doesn't have a bum oil pump holding it back. Take a look at the 1/4 mile database, and take a look at what mods were done to achieve those times. It should be pretty obvious what the better platform is. NA or boosted, the eco's are faster, easier.
15.3 @ 89.97mph - '01 SFGT
'98 Acura 1.6EL Sport 5M Y7/Y8 mini me
In a stock vs. stock,manual vs.manual,auto vs. auto 1/4 mile race(depending on the year,miles,etc:your saying a 2.2 ECO will win over a 2.4?I disagree.I do however, like the ECO and the support it has but shall we look at the h.p. thread?Yes Hahn is leading with an ECO but look at the others besides Raven(V6)...all 2.4Ld9 motors.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Tuesday, September 25, 2007 2:35 PM
15.2@89mph 2.171 60ft. 9.830 1/8 R.I.P. "LULU"
"the stock eco will stomp all over every other stock J engine"...
^^^ Not to start anything but i dont agree with that... when i took my stock 99 Z to the Track i raced a stock 03 LS sport He reaction time was greater the mine and they were very very close but i still passed him before the line. the track was a 1/4 mile. Both cars were 5spds and both BONE STOCK bot to each there own. both engines are very stong but i would rather stay with the LD9 just b/c that the only motor that i have work on in the 3rd gen J-bodys.
99z for 2015.. I'm back bitches
they're both really good, strong running engines but im gonna say the ECO is ten times more reliable than the 2.4 but i think there both too close to call as far as 1/4 mile times go. a good driver makes all the difference in the world. but i love both the motors equally.
as long as its a J i don't care what motor it has....
coming from a person that has owned both, i pick the L61 for a few reasons.
1. New, more reliable technology
2. HUGE aftermarket in comparison to that of the LD9
3. Easier to wrench on
4. (something not mentioned yet) All aluminum block AND heads
87 Firebird
All stock...........lol.
Quote:
Stock vs. Stock, the eco wins if for no other reason than it will handle more power on stock components.
can someone plz explain to me what "being able to handle more power" has to do with a stock for stock race?? that just didnt make any sense
Ian Brydon wrote:1) Stock vs. Stock, the eco wins if for no other reason than it will handle more power on stock components.
2) Once you start modding, the margin of win gets bigger, there's more parts available,
3) it's lighter, stronger, and doesn't have a bum oil pump holding it back.
4) Take a look at the 1/4 mile database, and take a look at what mods were done to achieve those times.
5) It should be pretty obvious what the better platform is. NA or boosted, the eco's are faster, easier.
1) Its stock... so handling more power on stock components means nothing
2) you're forgeting the boat load of GM made products that will attach to this motor (all the 2.3 HO stuff)
3) this is a correct statement... however... convert over the the 2.3 HO oil pump, and its no longer being held back
4) Look at the HP thread... most of the cars on top are 2.4s ... with GM made parts
5) N/A Stock eco vs stock LD9... i think it all depends on the driver...
i do agree both motors are strong... and both have extreme potential... I've seen a Stock Z24 w/ LD9 run a Stock HHR 2.4 Eco and beat it by nearly 2 car lengths over on the unused airstrip. again though its the driver...
Extreme Delusions(Speedline Z) wrote:Ian Brydon wrote:1) Stock vs. Stock, the eco wins if for no other reason than it will handle more power on stock components.
2) Once you start modding, the margin of win gets bigger, there's more parts available,
3) it's lighter, stronger, and doesn't have a bum oil pump holding it back.
4) Take a look at the 1/4 mile database, and take a look at what mods were done to achieve those times.
5) It should be pretty obvious what the better platform is. NA or boosted, the eco's are faster, easier.
1) Its stock... so handling more power on stock components means nothing
2) you're forgeting the boat load of GM made products that will attach to this motor (all the 2.3 HO stuff)
3) this is a correct statement... however... convert over the the 2.3 HO oil pump, and its no longer being held back
4) Look at the HP thread... most of the cars on top are 2.4s ... with GM made parts
5) N/A Stock eco vs stock LD9... i think it all depends on the driver...
i do agree both motors are strong... and both have extreme potential... I've seen a Stock Z24 w/ LD9 run a Stock HHR 2.4 Eco and beat it by nearly 2 car lengths over on the unused airstrip. again though its the driver...
I'm confused...
If you already know all of this, why did you even bother starting this thread?
Extreme Delusions(Speedline Z) wrote:I do not want this thread to turn in to a pissing contest between LD9 an Eco owners... i just want to hear the pros and cons of each motor from respective motors in terms as what you can do with it to make it more efficient and the reliability of the motor (or in other words Longevity after modifying) . Please back up your statements.
Sound a bit hypocritical if you ask me.
-
"Youth in Asia"...I don't see anything wrong with that.
Randy Beuc wrote:coming from a person that has owned both, i pick the L61 for a few reasons.
1. New, more reliable technology
2. HUGE aftermarket in comparison to that of the LD9
3. Easier to wrench on
4. (something not mentioned yet) All aluminum block AND heads
I4's only have 1 head....And actually it was mentioned...
Brian Whalen wrote:
But seriously, ECOs are lighter and easier to work with the top end (i.e. changing out cams or the head), as well as have the full support of GM racing behind them. LD9s are decent motors, and can be great motors after they are molested with 2.3L parts. Either way, both of the motor's blocks and cranks can take one hell of a beating. Speaking of which, ECOs actually had a forged crank made for them by Eagle, whereas the LD9 did not. ECOs also have aftermarket heads available.
The main benefit of the LD9 is cost, because we take parts off of an already existing motor for performance, where something like an assembled ECO patriot stage 2 head can cost around $1300 and an 086 head (or p&p 2.4L head) with ss valves can cost less than $500 for similar (or better) air flow. The same concept can be applied to cams as well.
Ian Brydon wrote:Stock vs. Stock, the eco wins if for no other reason than it will handle more power on stock components. Once you start modding, the margin of win gets bigger, there's more parts available, it's lighter, stronger, and doesn't have a bum oil pump holding it back. Take a look at the 1/4 mile database, and take a look at what mods were done to achieve those times. It should be pretty obvious what the better platform is. NA or boosted, the eco's are faster, easier.
...and the Quad4&TC motors have an aluminum head as well.
-
"Youth in Asia"...I don't see anything wrong with that.
