IM starting to build the bottom end of my 2200 what parts exactly will i need i have the wesico pistons eagle rods and the bearings what other parts will i need for this i will also be getting a cam not sure what one or where yet

For the cam, you would probably be best getting a regrind done. You might want to think about head work too, a mild port and polish, with new roller rockers would give you a nice bit of power.

what else am i missing that i need to build the bottom end

A Melling M98 oil pump & pick-up for the '90-'93 Cavy 2.0L is a definate requirement here. And try searching here for anything related or in reference to you app under the headings of: OHV, 2.2L, 2200 & LN2. Look for paticularly for anything writen by MadJack, OHV Notec or Slowolej as they have been hobbying with the LN2 the longest and have the most knowledge to give on this subject. And tell 'em Nickel sent ya!

Go beyond the "bolt-on".

swap it out for a LD9 or L61, 2200 is a piece of @!#$. I hate that dam engine.



GMR has got nothing on this

DOHC_tuner wrote:swap it out for a LD9 or L61, 2200 is a piece of @!#$. I hate that dam engine.

If you hate the motor so much, why do you spend all you time trolling for the threads about them? Do you not have anything else better to do?

Thank you, Jack! And on the same note, I leave a quote to the LD9 crowd IC they think of ever saying anything more: Arguing on the internet is like running in the Specail Olympics... You may win, but you're still retarded.

Don't mind the PC-ness, folks, just try to get the message!

Go beyond the "bolt-on".

is there a build guide or anything like that for the 2200 i have searched it comes up with some things but i cant find anything like that

Quote:

ook for paticularly for anything writen by MadJack, OHV Notec or Slowolej

Event is another level headed individual with 2.2 experience. He hasn't been very active in the last couple of years, but when he was a regular he had some good advice based on practical experience.

-->Slow

MadJack wrote:

DOHC_tuner wrote:swap it out for a LD9 or L61, 2200 is a piece of @!#$. I hate that dam engine.

If you hate the motor so much, why do you spend all you time trolling for the threads about them? Do you not have anything else better to do?

just when i log on to jbody there isnt any interesting info threads to look up, but when some newb wants to fix up a 2200 i crack up cause its like some honda guys i know who think there civic with the SOHC "NON" vtec engine is fast


GMR has got nothing on this

That doesn't make it a bad engine to modify. Infact, you show your true ignorant colors by assuming because an engines power output is low that is it not worth modding.

We've beaten this horse to death before, revived it, then beat it to death again. There is a lot more than just factory power output to think about when your building an engine. Some engines than don't make @!#$ for power stock can make some tremendous numbers and be strong as hell when modded proper. Take a look at the lowly Saturn 1.9 dohc engine. It's a turd stock, but if you boost it and pick your parts wisely they'll outpower most of the turbo Ecos and 2.4s here. I say MOST there because we do have a few big power guys with the 2.4s and Ecos, but seriously like only 3 - 5 over 300 horse.

Cant say im ignorant cause obviously your are, im bashing on a single cam engine. your back up is a saturn 1.9 "DOHC" engine. So....basically your saying the same thing i am. Do you get in now?


GMR has got nothing on this

Ignorant isn't the best word to describe you through and through, but you are a bit of a product of ignorance.

My using the 1.9 is only a reference for a @!#$ty stock engine that can be built to kill. The reason this reference works is because every v8 diehard ever will tell every 4 cylinder builder that they are wasting their time. Much like you thinking you are high and mighty because stock for stock the LD9 is faster than the LN2.

I just wish the Scruffdog was still around because I bet his built LN2 would've walked your yet to be completed Ld9.

Look....let me type slower....for you KFLO.......Im not comparing anything to anything. I see your point of the V8 topic, but all Im trying to say is a Single cam motor is not worth to build as a N/A beast or even add boost. Is there even a aftermarket intake available for that piece of @!#$?


GMR has got nothing on this

To DOHC_tuner: See "Special Olympics" line stated above. This applies to you. And yes, there is a manifold for it (At least in truck trim at turbos10.com). That is if you mean the part that bolts to the head. Otherwise, there are plenty of CAI & WAI tracs available in the aftermarket. EOS.

Go beyond the "bolt-on".

I love to hear the 2.4 guys. You know the ones, they have to revert to using parts and designs form the "pre-wussified" version of the 2.4 in order to really brag about it. Olds built a good engine in the original 2.3, but it developed a bad rap and no one wanted it. Then GM decided to throw bad money after good and make a SOHC version of the engine, which still, no one wanted. Then GM decided to stuff it up our arses by taking away the V6, which we know full well if offered against the 2.4 would have been 1st choice for anyone looking for performance. Instead of a performer, GM forced consumers to choose the powered down, milder cam, reduced performance oil system containing version of what was once a damn potent engine. As far as the criticism goes, it's kind of like saying the 1981 Vette w/ a 305 was a performance car simply because once upon a time 10 years prior the Vette really did have some performance potential. But like the 81 Vette, you've got to spend a fair amount of money and time on the 2.4 to make it a real performer. Now forOHV reliability, I can say that I was able to add a junkyard turbo and a few homemade parts to my engine and get a quick lil performer which lived as long as the car it was installed in. I'm fairly certain the fragile and moody 2.4 would have thrown a fit and a few parts long before the OHV.

But ya know, speaking of the V6 and DOHC engines, does it seem a bit strange that GM, OEM masters of pushrod performance and 2 valve per cylinder power, decided that the 3.4L DOHC engine was only good as a marketing magic trick? They let it disappear in a puff of smoke and blown timing belts to be replaced by such engineering behemoths as the OHV 3400, 3500, and the lowly 3800SC engines. Hard to believe that their engineering studies and cost analysis combined with almost a hundred years of design experience hasn't fooled them into seeing the world through in same smoke and mirrored light as the masses who claim life without "DOHC" and "multi-valve" just isn't worth living. I suppose if I were of the DOHC crowd I could at least find solace in knowing that I would make a good lemming if the need ever arose.

When will you people learn!

Amen, Slow. I totally hear ya about the '81 Cali-emissions 'Vette (What a slander on a good name, from in-house no less!). True, the Quad4 in retrospect does seem more like a marketing gimmick than anything given how the 2.3L version can't last past 100,000 miles without needing a full rebuild. Guess that's what you get for letting a english putt-putt sportscar builder design an engine for you! Funny thing, though... when the Gen2 426 Hemi was introduced, it's press tech books said it could see 100,000 miles of normal operation before needing a rebuild. Of course, what's considered "normal operation" for a 426 Hemi? lol.

As for the DOHC 3.4L V-6, I always thought it was a same that it never saw option in the Fiero, despite the fact that all the parts to install it had been tooled as one-off final product prototypes. A friend of mine knows who has them and has installed this engine in a '88 GT model. Still it's a shame the engine never got offered from the factory in the Fiero, even in the year it debuted ('88). It just might have saved the car. Which would have been nice since that was the year it got all it's own suspension and steering, which also had improved and improved the car's handling to boot. But I degress.

Go beyond the "bolt-on".

Hey, Steve... See: "Special Olympics" too! Huh? Huh?

Go beyond the "bolt-on".

Im sorry, but I can't agree with your quote. Argueing over the internet is not a bad thing. Arguing is just standing by your opinion. Saying someone is retarding for arguing is like saying someone is retarded for having an opinion. To re-write you quote; "To insult someone over the internet is like participating in the special olympics, it does not matter if you win or lose, you will always be retarded." Something I don't like is people saying there are no interesting, or informational threads, and then saying he likes to bash on all the ohv threads. There are no good threads because people like you ruin them! If he would actually read the threads he is bashing on, he would realize, the ohv threadsthat are not full of dohc lovers, bashing on the ohv, are very informational threads, filled with very useful information. Just because you dont have the best engine, doesnt mean you cant go fast. The SOHC honda's are slow engines. Even their DOHC VTEC engines are not really fast. Its how much work you put in them, and how much enjoyment you get out of them. Someone with a v8 will look at anyone with a four cyclinder and say just what you did. "WHY?". For that answer, read Madjack's profile.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edited Sunday, December 02, 2007 9:04 PM

DOHC_tuner wrote:Cant say im ignorant cause obviously your are, im bashing on a single cam engine.

well i've pointed this out before, but its fact and in the history books.

myself wrote:i've seen that byron clemens 2.2ohv 1996 sunfire ran 13.6 in the 1/4 mile ...N/A no less..... but it weighs 2300lbs...yet we see guys with ecotecs, ld9's and some with 2.3's struggle to break into the 13's.

the thing is, for ANYONE whos head isnt in their ass 24/7 can realize, any engine can be made fast..... if you know what the f--- you are doing. funny part is, many of the people you see badmouthing anything, usually dont know what the f---- they are doing.

SCC magazine showcased that, when a retired auto engineer who was a teacher, gathered up his high school "squad" and built a 3 cylinder geo metro into a turbocharged 150mph record breaking......geo metro.

yet we got DOHC tuner over here making the statements....

the dohc idiot wrote:but all Im trying to say is a Single cam motor is not worth to build as a N/A beast or even add boost. Is there even a aftermarket intake available for that piece of @!#$?

but earlier stated

the dohc idiot wrote:swap it out for a LD9 or L61, 2200 is a piece of @!#$. I hate that dam engine.

this comes from the guy who has boost for plans in his future mods, so he's basically N/A and a single cam 2.2L ohv engine has already run faster than he....or she, whatever it may be.

he hates something he has no experience with apparently.... he doesnt know if an intake is available, so kinda shows he doesnt know sh-t..., or his lame jokes are worse than johnny fairplay with danny bonaduce in the background.... and then stating single cam motors arent worth being an n/a beast or add boost?

hmm last i checked, i;ve seen some v6 sohc stangs put down some good times and good performances..... granted if you wanna be technical, its 2 cams per engine, but in that case the hemi's at the last charger meet were simply amazing. one single cam in the entire engine, imagine that? then on this site, back in the day, scruf as someone mentioned, was one of the first cavaliers to reach 13 seconds... not single cammed cavaliers, but ALL J-BODIES...ln2, ld9, or the 2.3..... his car is sitting in my parking lot next to my charger right now. cant say i;ve ever ridden in it, but that due to having one seat.... although if you are serious about building something, you do it.... unlike the idiot we seen post with a white car thats mainly modded for looks, but knows so much about a engine he doesnt seem to possess ANY COMMON LOGICAL KNOWLEDGE ABOUT....



Adam, a short list to start building up....for bottom end.

you got the cams, pistons, bearings, and rods....


dont forget the small stuff

crankwork, such as knifeedge, oil pump, timing chain and tensioner, lifters....

even smaller,

if you can, the oil chamfers can be slightly modified, micropolish the hard surfaces of the crank, and most shops DONT do it, but make sure the crank stays internally balanced....some shops people have said they change it around a bit...

those are just some simple basics. obviously, depending on the type of build you do will determine how you will gap the piston rings and how much space is between the rings on the piston to the top of the piston....

outside of that, everything else is basic. just remember, for the timing chain, oil pump, parts like that... sometimes its better to pay 60$ for something new, than to reuse.

DOHC_tuner wrote:Look....let me type slower....for you KFLO.......Im not comparing anything to anything. I see your point of the V8 topic, but all Im trying to say is a Single cam motor is not worth to build as a N/A beast or even add boost. Is there even a aftermarket intake available for that piece of @!#$?

At least the Quad4 HO manifold won't fit. Otherwise we'd be losing power like the LD9 crowd is who hang their hat on this swap. Let's see, a stock Alero tips the scales at around 3,000 to begin with, throw on a little more weight with a bodykit, and add a horsepower losing manifold from a different engine with different characteristics. I wouldn't be surprised if a base OHV cav with an intake and full exhaust runs a quicker time than yours, but that didn't stop you from trolling in this thread.

Now here's a stock for stock race versus the LN2 and LD9 I'd like to see. Let's drain 1 1/2 quarts of oil out of each engine and run them on the expressway to the rev limiter in second gear and see which engine lets go first.

thanks for the info im going to start lookign for a good manchine shop to get all the extra work done and any more info on a 2200 build will be very helpfull

Why do ya'll keep saying its a good engine with boost? Any motor can be quick with boost...add boost to a 3 cylinder from geo and call it quick. Im saying the 2200 is not worth the time to be built as a N/A beast. With that money spent you might aswell swap in the newer L61helping raise the value of the car. Alot of individuals here dont comprehend my theory of building a motor. Any one can throw a turbo on "ANY" car and call it quick. Now determine the value of the vehicle and suggested profit income given after selling the piece of @!#$ LN2. You wont get @!#$. Now I know I am building the outdated LD9 yet its value overpasses the LN2 in retail and on the street. Look at it as a sellers prospective, if I had a built LN2 I would have a smaller crowd to sell it too once Ive had my fun with it or blew it up. Yet cause I have the LD9 I can profit from any Z24's,Sunfire Gt's, Aleros, Grand ams. etc....WHAT IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY COST OF BUILDING AN LN2 VERSUS A LD9? well first of all even one penny spent on that vehicle would be a loss. Why? Price difference between a Z24 and a Rally cav. (because of the platform the vehicle cost more OR less. ITS ALL ABOUT THE BENJAMINS. now i was planning to do the eco swap because of my economic theory yet lacked the funds and i fell in love with the QUAD 4. As for the HO manifold on a N/a motor, one will not loose torque or HP IF the head is ported and polished, good headers and exhaust, good cams, to allow for the extra air flow. gET iT riGht!!!


GMR has got nothing on this

DOHC_tuner wrote:Why do ya'll keep saying its a good engine with boost? Any motor can be quick with boost...add boost to a 3 cylinder from geo and call it quick. Im saying the 2200 is not worth the time to be built as a N/A beast. With that money spent you might aswell swap in the newer L61helping raise the value of the car. Alot of individuals here dont comprehend my theory of building a motor. Any one can throw a turbo on "ANY" car and call it quick. Now determine the value of the vehicle and suggested profit income given after selling the piece of @!#$ LN2. You wont get @!#$. Now I know I am building the outdated LD9 yet its value overpasses the LN2 in retail and on the street. Look at it as a sellers prospective, if I had a built LN2 I would have a smaller crowd to sell it too once Ive had my fun with it or blew it up. Yet cause I have the LD9 I can profit from any Z24's,Sunfire Gt's, Aleros, Grand ams. etc....WHAT IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY COST OF BUILDING AN LN2 VERSUS A LD9? well first of all even one penny spent on that vehicle would be a loss. Why? Price difference between a Z24 and a Rally cav. (because of the platform the vehicle cost more OR less. ITS ALL ABOUT THE BENJAMINS. now i was planning to do the eco swap because of my economic theory yet lacked the funds and i fell in love with the QUAD 4. As for the HO manifold on a N/a motor, one will not loose torque or HP IF the head is ported and polished, good headers and exhaust, good cams, to allow for the extra air flow. gET iT riGht!!!

Damn troll.