ok so i may be miss informed but from what iv been reading, the ecotecs changed over the years 02-05, i know the cobalt 2.2/2.0 is alot differenet but i thought all cavaliers had the same ones?
are all what you guys are calling an L61? whats the differences? i have an 02 LSS automatic and my fiance had a 03 LSS 4 door and now has an 04 LSS 2 door. so im trying to grasp whats the difference so i know which direction to go if i wanted to build my 02 LSS
John Lenko wrote: It is bad. Stop. Now. Bad. Bad bad. Bad bad bad.
...j
From what I know they are the same motor the only difference is the fuel rail and injectors. 02 uses short injectors amd 03-05 use the lomg style. You can swap fuel rails though amd have em be the same
ok i was reading somewhere on here that the 02 ecos dont take boost as well as the 03-05 but that may be miss informations
any performance differences in 02-05?
John Lenko wrote: It is bad. Stop. Now. Bad. Bad bad. Bad bad bad.
...j
There are a few differences, but overall the L61 (2.2L) is the same.
As stated, the '02 had the cobalt style fuel rail and injectors. 03-05 has the new style rail and uses the longer pencil style injectors. 03-05 also received revised piston rings, which is why they tend to handle boost better. Sometime in late '04 into '05 they also removed the egr casting from the side of the head (which was never used for the J anyway), which im guessing was a design change in preparation for use in the cobalt/hhr/etc.
So any performance gains, not really. Other than the better ringlands of the 03+ and i personally thing its easier to find injectors for the 03+ rail that you can use from other cars (ford color tops, LT and LS motors, etc)
I believe if you swap fuel rails though you must also swap pcm's.
Ive been told the 02 injector constant is slightly different than the 03-05. I agree since when I did the swap it didn't run exactly right till I swapped PCM's
oh ok makes sence, but if the 02 fuel rain is same as a cobalt, then wouldnt that make a cobalt motor swap easier? say i wanted a SC or turbo cobalt motor??? lol
John Lenko wrote: It is bad. Stop. Now. Bad. Bad bad. Bad bad bad.
...j
Tyler Howland wrote:oh ok makes sence, but if the 02 fuel rain is same as a cobalt, then wouldnt that make a cobalt motor swap easier? say i wanted a SC or turbo cobalt motor??? lol
No because the trigger wheel on the crankshaft is different and our ecus cannot run it.
Besides the supercharger and turbocharger are a direct bolt on to our ecos.
There were also some minor changes in the block too. I'll see if I can find the thread..
"In Oldskool we trust"
ok thanks guys youve been a great help in almost all my questions, ARE YOU THE ONLY 2 ON HERE!?!
just kidding, anyways i would love to make it supercharged someday this year, only if the 124k eco can handle it without a rebuild
John Lenko wrote: It is bad. Stop. Now. Bad. Bad bad. Bad bad bad.
...j
Nope just have a boring job and love the jbo
Anyway I had a list somewhere of all the revisions to the L61 from 02-05 but I can't find it now. Everything said above is spot on. The major highlights are the fuel rail, injectors, and rings. The other stuff was minor changes like block girdling, EGR, etc.
"In Oldskool we trust"
Tyler Howland wrote:ok thanks guys youve been a great help in almost all my questions, ARE YOU THE ONLY 2 ON HERE!?!
just kidding, anyways i would love to make it supercharged someday this year, only if the 124k eco can handle it without a rebuild
You're fine supercharging a 124k motor, just get a good tune and stay in a conservative power range. Mine had about 125k when I boosted it on a 3.1 pulley. Would probably still be running had I not had a lash adjuster fail, which I blame on big cams
There were also changes to the timing chain for oiling reasons. I also believe the timing chain tensioner was revised as well.
yea i was planing on grabing a set of Comp cams for it also since i see they make em for NA and boosted ecos.
and what do you mean by "conservative power range''? dont beat the hell outa it? or dont ever rev it? it is an automatice to remember lol, i wanted a 5 speed like my 00 and i wanted a 2.4, but i couldnt pass up this LSS, so i settled for an eco and auto, oh well, try something new
iv always had 70s and 80s sbc cars and all were auto and iv built them before, why doesnt anyone really like buolding the autos in cavs?
if my IROC has a 700r4 thats built and when it shifts into second can lay rubber again while rolling why cant a cav? that would be sick concidering most people think auto cavaliers are slow.... for what reason i have no idea, maybe a 2.2 OHV is slow? i had a 92 2.2 with a getrag behind it and it was alot quicker then 2.2 ohv autos iv rolled with
however iv never drivin an ecotec 5 speed, only my 2.4 5 speed 00z and with the work i did it was pretty quick but wasnt fast enough!
id like to break 13s and still be automatic just to purely defy what people are telling me that autos are junk
John Lenko wrote: It is bad. Stop. Now. Bad. Bad bad. Bad bad bad.
...j
You really just get more out of a 4 cylinder with a 5 speed. Just the way it is with most 4 bangers.
"In Oldskool we trust"
Nice thing about autos is no missed shifts
Luke C wrote:Nice thing about autos is no missed shifts
odd...some of the faster v8 autos ive beant I could have sworn tried using that 'miss-shift' as an excuse lol
04 Cav. 2dr. 5spd. My DD. 'Nuff said.
blu04DD wrote:Luke C wrote:Nice thing about autos is no missed shifts
odd...some of the faster v8 autos ive beant I could have sworn tried using that 'miss-shift' as an excuse lol
Haha...need to think of something when you're beat by a car with half the engine you have lol
Tyler Howland wrote:yea i was planing on grabing a set of Comp cams for it also since i see they make em for NA and boosted ecos.
and what do you mean by "conservative power range''? dont beat the hell outa it? or dont ever rev it?
What I mean is don't go slapping a tiny pulley on it and try to break records, and you'll still get plenty of life out of the motor. Throw on a 3.1 pulley and get a good tune, it'll be a fun car to drive, run in the 13s, and will last.
EVILution (KGMs FrankenCav) wrote:Tyler Howland wrote:yea i was planing on grabing a set of Comp cams for it also since i see they make em for NA and boosted ecos.
and what do you mean by "conservative power range''? dont beat the hell outa it? or dont ever rev it?
What I mean is don't go slapping a tiny pulley on it and try to break records, and you'll still get plenty of life out of the motor. Throw on a 3.1 pulley and get a good tune, it'll be a fun car to drive, run in the 13s, and will last.
This is pretty much my plan.
"In Oldskool we trust"
I thought 03+ piston design was worse as they moved the ringlands closer to the top of the piston for better emissions. if memory serves me correctly quite a few 03+ cars had cracked pistons early on when boosting due to the change.
^ That is correct. 02's had thicker ringlands and then they made them thinner in the later years.
Interesting. I wonder if its a measurable advantage. Ie, blow a piston in a 03-05 and pop in all 4 from an 02 on a budget rebuild.
"In Oldskool we trust"
yea exactly what im looking for, i just want a fun car thats quick that will last and that can be daily drivin, for pure speed i have a 1985 IROC Z28 (pending sale meaning possibly grabing a 1972 Chevy Nova sunday)
and what do you mean exactly by a 3.1 pulley? are you refering to a 3.1L? u mean 3.8? ya confused me
and i know everyone who seriously builds a 4 cyl cav always gets a 5 speed, wellllll i wana be different and build an auto, i plan on beefing up the trans as well when it goes boosted
John Lenko wrote: It is bad. Stop. Now. Bad. Bad bad. Bad bad bad.
...j
3.1 is the size of the pulley in inches (i believe). Stock the m62 comes with a 3.4.
